Key takeaways
Service of legal documents does not require actual physical receipt
As per Rule 271.6.b RoP, service is deemed effective even if physical acceptance of a document is refused, as long as the addressee was properly notified and had a reasonable opportunity to collect it.
In this case, the defendant’s inaction in collecting the statement of claim was considered a refusal of acceptance, leading to deemed service.
The date of deemed service is crucial for determining deadlines, including the deadline for statement of defence (Rule 271.6.b RoP)
The court deemed the statement of claim served on the tenth day following its initial posting.
The defendants were then given a deadline to file their statement of defence.
The UPC prioritizes procedural efficiency in line with its service rules
The court’s approach to deemed service aims to prevent intentional delays and ensure the efficient progression of cases.
By recognizing the defendant’s awareness of the document and opportunity to collect it, the court emphasized the importance of timely engagement with legal proceedings.
The ruling provides clarity on the interpretation of “refusal of acceptance”
The decision clarifies that “refusal of acceptance” encompasses situations where a party is notified about a deliverable legal document but chooses not to collect it.
This interpretation provides a practical understanding of the provision and sets a precedent for future cases involving similar procedural issues.
Division
Local Division Munich
UPC number
UPC_CFI_119/2025
Type of proceedings
Infringement Action
Parties
Claimants:
Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co., Ltd
Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co., Ltd.
Defendants:
LONGi Solar Technologie GmbH
LONGi Green Energy Technology Co. Ltd.
LONGI SOLAR FRANCE SARL.
Soltech Energy GbR
Longi (Netherlands) Trading B.V.
Energy3000 solar GmbH
Patent(s)
EP 4 372 829
Jurisdictions
UPC
Body of legislation / Rules
R. 271.6.b RoP, R. 271.8 RoP, R. 275 RoP
