Court of Appeal, November 21, 2024, Order, UPC_CoA_456/2024

A case is amended when the nature or scope of the dispute changes. For example, in an infringement case, this occurs if the plaintiff invokes a different patent or objects to a different product.

R. 13 RoP requires that the Statement of Claim contains the reasons why the facts relied on constitute an infringement of the patent claims, including arguments of law. This provision must be interpreted in light of the final sentence of Recital 7 of the Preamble to the Rules of Procedure, which requires parties to set out their case as early as possible in the proceedings.

Whether a new argument is admissible depends on the circumstances of the case, including the reasons why the claimant had not already raised the argument in the Statement of Claim and the procedural opportunities for the defendant to respond to the new argument. In making this assessment, the Court of First Instance has a certain discretion. The Court of Appeal’s review is thus limited.

If the opposing party is of the opinion that a new argument is inadmissible, it can object to it. The Court may raise the issue of admissibility of a new argument ex officio. The Court will decide after hearing the parties. The Court may defer that decision until the interim procedure or the final decision. If the new argument is inadmissible and the opposing party has submitted a defence on the substance of the new argument, the Court may take this into account when awarding costs.