Home » UPC decisions » Central Division » CD Paris, December 27, 2024, Application under Rule 333 RoP for review of security for costs, UPC_CFI_164/2024

CD Paris, December 27, 2024, Application under Rule 333 RoP for review of security for costs, UPC_CFI_164/2024

3 min Reading time

Key takeaways

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.

Even in absence of a specific and direct legal provision, parties can apply to revoke or vary a security for costs order (Rule 158 RoP) if there is a change in the underlying factual circumstances of said order.

A reduction in the damages claimed after the initial filing of an infringement action will not affect the amount of the security, which is based on the value of the case at the time of filing (Rule 370.6 RoP).

Additional arguments by the application regarding the appropriateness of the security amount were not addressed, as they did not rely on new factual circumstances but rather critiqued the original order. Such arguments cannot be considered in an application to amend the amount of security for costs pursuant to Rule 158 RoP, but can rather only be raised on appeal (Rule 220.2 RoP).

Division

Central Division Paris

UPC number

UPC_CFI_164/2024; App_55923/2024; ORD_45914/2024

Type of proceedings

Infringement Proceedings

Parties

Applicant: Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy

Respondent: Microsoft Corporation

Patent(s)

EP 2 671 173

Body of legislation / Rules

Rule 158 RoP

Rule 333 RoP

Rule 370.6 RoP

Rule 220.2 RoP


Was the article helpful?


Categories


Tags

  • German and European Patent Attorney, UPC Representative, Senior Associate

  • Attorney-at-Law (Rechtsanwalt), UPC Representative, Partner

Stay in the loop

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

* = Required field