Key takeaways
If an infringement action is withdrawn before the Statement of Claim is served on defendants, this is a withdrawal before the closure of the written procedure in the meaning of R. 370.9 RoP. Consequently, 60% of the court fees will regularly be reimbursed upon reasoned application.
Interestingly, the Regional Division did not comment on how the requirement under R. 265.1 RoP that the other party shall be heard before the withdrawal, can be fulfilled in cases where the Statement of Claim has not been served on (all) defendants. In this particular case, it appears that some defendants had been officially served and commented on the withdrawal, which the court likely deemed sufficient, since all defendants seem to belong to the same group of companies.
The value in dispute will be the value in dispute indicated in the Statement of Claim, if this value is not contested by the defendant and deemed appropriate by the court.
The value of an infringement action is regularly determined in the interim conference. This order clarifies how it can be determined if the infringement action is withdrawn before the interim conference takes place.
Division
Nordic-Baltic Regional Division
UPC number
UPC_ CFI_11/2023
Type of proceedings
Infringement Action
Parties
Claimant: Ocado Innovation Limited
Defendants: Autostore AS; Autostore Sp. z o.o., Autostore System AB, Autostore S.A.S., Autostore System GmbH, Autostore System AT GmbH, Autostore System AT GmbH, Autostore System S.L
Patent(s)
EP3653540
Body of legislation / Rules
- Rule 265 RoP
- Rule 370.9 RoP
- Rule 370.10 RoP