Key takeaways
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 wouldn’t enhance public understanding, while the Respondent argued for transparency and public scrutiny of the court’s reasoning.
Balancing of Interests (Article 45 UPCA)
✓
- The integrity of proceedings must be balanced against the public interest.
- Public’s interest in understanding the decision-making process outweighs potential harm to the integrity of proceedings
“Reasoned request” is necessary for access
✓
- Rule 262.1(b) RoP requires applicants to explain their purpose for seeking access and how it aligns with the general interest.
- Citing Ocado v Autostore, the Court highlighted the need to identify specific documents and explain the purpose for seeking access.
- The Respondent’s request was deemed reasonable as it aimed to understand the CFI’s decision based on the presented arguments and evidence, aligning with transparency.
Pending appeals don’t automatically bar public access
✓
- Once the CFI issues a decision, the need to protect the integrity of those proceedings diminishes.
- The Court reasoned that public discussion is inevitable during appeals and subsequent proceedings, justifying access to CFI records.
- The decision clarified that even in cases involving provisional measures (R.206 RoP), public scrutiny should not be hindered.
Division
Court of Appeal
UPC number
UPC_CoA_480/2024; UPC_CoA_481/2024
Type of proceedings
Appeal
Parties
- Appellant (Applicant in the main proceedings): Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. (‘Abbott’)
- Respondent (Applicant for access to the register): Powell Gilbert LLP (‘Powell Gilbert’)
- Defendants in the main proceedings: Sibio Technology Limited and Umedwings Netherlands B.V. (‘Sibionics’)
Patent(s)
EP 2 713 879 and EP 3 831 283
Jurisdictions
Unified Patent Court
Body of legislation / Rules
- Rule 262.1(b) RoP
- Rule 206 RoP
- Article 45 UPCA
