UPC Decisions
- Central Division
- Duesseldorf Local Division
- Hamburg Local Division
- Helsinki Local Division
- Lisbon Local Division
- Local Division
- Luxembourg Court of Appeal
- Mannheim Local Division
- Milan Central Division
- Milan Local Division
- Munich Central Division
- Munich Local Division
- Nordic-Baltic Regional Division
- Paris Central Division
- Paris Local Division
- Regional Division
- The Hague Local Division
- Vienna Local Division
-
CoA, January 15, 2025 order concerning the need to adjudicate UPC_CoA_584-2024
No need to adjudiacte also when appeal has become devoid of purpose: R.360 RoP applies not only when the action itself has become devoid of purpose, but also when the appeal has become devoid of purpose. According to R.360 RoP the Court may at any time, on the application of a party or its own…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, January 10, 2025, order in cost reimbursment procedure, UPC_CFI_249/2023
No interest is added to reimbursable costs of procedures and disbursements in cost reimbursment proceedings: Contrary to German case law there is no interest to be added to reimbursable costs of procedures and disbursments in cost reimbursment proceedings. There is no legal basis for such interest in Rule 151 RoP. Whereas Rules 125 and 131…
2 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
CD Paris, September 16, 2024, decision by default in revocation action, UPC_CFI_412/2023
Requirements of a decision by default: Pursuant to Rule 355 RoP a decision by default against the defendant may be granted where: i) the relevant request is submitted by the claimant; ii) the defendant fails to take a step within the time limit foreseen in the Rules of Procedure or set by the Court, or…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Vienna, January 15, 2025, order in first instance on infringement, UPC_CFI_33/2024
No action for revocation despite objection of nullity: If the allegation is made in the proceedings that the patent is invalid, the statement of defence must contain a counterclaim for revocation of the patent against the proprietor of the patent (R. 25 RoP, R. 42 RoP). Without such counterclaim, the invalidity defence (here: exceeding the…
4 min Reading time→ -
CoA, January 15, 2025, order on withdrawal, UPC_CoA_629/2024
Withdrawal of the action during appeal proceedings possible: After the first instance infringement decision was appealed, the decision on withdrawal is within the competence of the CoA. According to R. 265.1 RoP, the decision of the first instance is not final. Therefore, admissibility of the withdrawal of the infringment action is not precluded during appeal.…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, January 13, 2025, revised order on auxiliary requests, UPC_CFI_298/2023
The number of 55 auxiliary requests can be reasonable: Upon panel review the court views the number of 55 auxiliary requests as exceptionally high but not unreasonable. Considering the extreme complexity of the case (in particular in view of the number of grounds of invalidity raised), the importance of the patent at issue and the…
3 min Reading time→ -
CoA, January 14, 2024, order on panel review, UPC_CoA_651/2024
Order on security is case management and open for panel review (R. 333 RoP): Judge-rapporteur can issue an order for security of costs. There is no wording in R. 158 RoP that such orders shall be adopted by the panel. There is a broad scope for review of actions of the judge-rapporteur, as laid down…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Milan, January 15, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CFI_472/2024
The court may set deadlines to await an upcoming appeals decision of the EPO: The coordination between the appeal proceedings before the EPO and the proceedings before UPC may be achieved in the most efficient way taking into account the position of all parties, for instance by extending the time limits for filing the statement…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, January 9, 2025, order concerning public access to the register, UPC_CoA_480/2024; UPC_CoA_481/2024
Public has a right to access court records: This right is enshrined in Rule 262.1(b) RoP and promotes transparency and trust in the court system. The Court of Appeal emphasized that this right allows the public to understand court decisions and scrutinize the court’s handling of disputes. The Appellant argued against public access, claiming it…
4 min Reading time→ -
CoA, January 8, 2025, order concerning an application to intervene, UPC_CoA_621/2024
Timing and grounds of an intervention (Rule 313 RoP): An application to intervene may be lodged at any stage of the proceedings by any person establishing a legal interest in the result of an action. An application to intervene shall only be admissible if it is made before the closure of the written procedure unless…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, December 23, 2024, oder concerning an application for a discretionary review (Rule 220.3 RoP)
Unconditional right to limit claims for damages (R. 263.3 RoP): An unconditional application to reduce the amount of damages claimed shall be considered as an unconditional application under Rule 263.3 RoP. Leave to limit a claim in an action unconditionally shall always be granted. Procedure for determining the value of the action (R. 22, 104,…
2 min Reading time→ -
CD Milan, December 23, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_ 380/2024
Criteria for intervention (Rule 313 RoP): An intervener must demonstrate a legally qualified interest, not merely a factual one. This interest must be connected to the legal relationship in litigation and entail potential harm to the intervener’s rights if the original party loses the case. Decision on costs of an application to intervene (Rule 150…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, December 27, 2024, Order concerning an application for additional Security for Costs, Rule 158 RoP, UPC_CFI_164/2024
Modification instead of additional request: Requests for increased security for costs are treated as modifications of existing orders, requiring analysis under Rule 158 RoP. Power to amend orders on security for costs: The UPC can amend orders on security for costs pursuant to Rule 158 RoP if the facts underlying the initial order have changed.…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, December 27, 2024, Application under Rule 333 RoP for review of security for costs, UPC_CFI_164/2024
Incorrect citation of legal provisions is harmless: The Court must consider a motion even if the legal provisions cited are incorrect, provided the correct legal grounds can be identified from the arguments and facts. The same applies if an application refers to an incorrect order. Change in factual circumstances can impact an existing order on…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Hamburg, December 30, 2024, No preliminary decision on admissibility of amendments of claims, UPC_CFI_173/2024 und 424/2024
No preliminary decisions on admissibility of requests for amendment of claims (Rule 263 RoP, Rule 30 RoP): It is generally not procedurally efficient to decide on the substantive admissibility of requests to amend claims (Rule 30 RoP) and corresponding amendments of the claim or the case (Rule 263 RoP) in a preliminary decision pursuant to…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, December 18, 2024, withdrawal of opt-out, exhaustion, and FRAND defense, UPC_CFI_9/2023
Withdrawal of opt-out effective if CMS workflow is used: The Court held that Claimant’s withdrawal of the opt-out was effective as Claimant used the online workflow in the Case Management System (CMS) according to Rule 5.7 RoP. It is not mandatory to use the provided template which is merely a non-binding support tool. The withdrawal…
6 min Reading time→ -
LD Paris, December 19, 2024, Order, UPC_CFI_358/2023
No Stay of Execution from the Court of First Instance: The Court rejected Claimant’s request for a stay of enforcement of its first instance decision during the appeal period as this decision is solely subject to the competence of the Court of Appeal according to Art. 74 UPCA and Rule 223 RoP. In such a…
3 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.