Home » UPC decisions » Local Division » Brussels Local Division » Brussels LD, March 18, 2026, Procedural Order (R. 158 RoP)(II), UPC_CFI_1357/2025, UPC_CFI_629/2026

Brussels LD, March 18, 2026, Procedural Order (R. 158 RoP)(II), UPC_CFI_1357/2025, UPC_CFI_629/2026

3 min Reading time

Key takeaways

The Court held that the defendants had not shown that recognition and enforcement proceedings in Costa Rica were “unduly burdensome” within the meaning of the UPC case law. In particular, the Court considered that the defendants had not provided a sufficient benchmark for assessing whether the alleged duration of recognition and enforcement proceedings in Costa Rica was excessive. At the same time, the Court noted that the duration of enforcement proceedings may still be a relevant factor when assessing concerns about the future recoverability of costs.

The Court made clear that the relevant assessment concerns the financial position of the claimant itself, not that of non-party group companies. It also held that, when setting the amount of security, the likely costs of a counterclaim for revocation may be taken into account where that counterclaim is a defensive response to the infringement action. Although the provisional ceiling for recoverable costs was set at EUR 1.2 million, the Court exercised its discretion to order security of 50% of that amount, i.e. EUR 600,000.

Division

Brussels Local Division

UPC number

UPC_CFI_1357/2025
UPC_CFI_629/2026

Type of proceedings

Infringement action; request for security for costs under R. 158 RoP

Parties

Applicants for security / defendants in the infringement action:
GC Aesthetics Parentco Limited, Nagor Limited, GC Aesthetics Management Limited, GC Aesthetics (Distribution) Limited, GC Aesthetics (France) SAS, Eurosilicone SAS, GC Aesthetics Italy S.r.l., GC Aesthetics GmbH, GC Aesthetics Spain, S.L.U., Global Consolidated Aesthetics (UK) Limited, GC Aesthetics Holdings Limited, GC Aesthetics Finance Limited, and Romed N.V.

Respondent to the security request / claimant in the infringement action:
Establishment Labs S.A.

Patent(s)

EP 3 107 487 B1

Body of legislation / Rules

Art. 69(4) UPCA
R. 158.1 RoP
R. 175.2 RoP


Was the article helpful?


Categories


Tags

  • Karin Bek, Attorney-at-Law (Rechtsanwältin), UPC Representative

    Attorney-at-Law (Rechtsanwältin), UPC Representative

Stay in the loop

Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.

* = Required field