Key takeaways
Applicable rule for the withdrawal of an appeal: R. 265 RoP, which has a broad scope
R. 265 RoP is primarily drafted with a view to comprehensive withdrawals of whole actions. It does neither distinguish between the first instance and the appeal proceedings nor between procedural appeal and appeals in substance. It does also not exclude the possibility to apply for a withdrawal for any category of action or stage of proceedings.
Withdrawal is nevertheless subject to observance of the rights of the respondent and proper conduct of proceedings
According to R. 265 RoP, it is in the discretion of the Court to decide on an application to withdraw. It is clearly stipulated that the other party shall be heard and that their interests shall be considered.
Main consideration for legitimate interests: content of the order or decision under appeal, and how a withdrawal would effect the respondent
If an appellant applies to withdraw an appeal in relation to only some of several respondents, the CoA decides on the admissibility and legal consequences of such an application
Whether an appeal can be withdrawn in relation to one or two of several respondents would depend on the circumstances of the case. The CoA will consider whether those respondents have already been served the Statement of grounds of appeal, whether they want the appeal to be adjudicated in relation to themselves as respondents and whether they have a legitimate interest in adjudication.
Division
Court of Appeal Luxembourg
UPC number
UPC_CoA_183/2024
Type of proceedings
Procedural order
Parties
Appellant (and Claimant in the main proceedings): Daedalus Prime LLC
Respondents (and Defendants in the main proceedings): Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V., Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH, et al.
Patent(s)
EP 2 792 100
Rules
Rule 265 RoP
