Institutions: Luxembourg Court of Appeal
-
CoA, January 8, 2025, order concerning an application to intervene, UPC_CoA_621/2024
Timing and grounds of an intervention (Rule 313 RoP): An application to intervene may be lodged at any stage of the proceedings by any person establishing a legal interest in the result of an action. An application to intervene shall only be admissible if it is made before the closure of the written procedure unless…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, December 23, 2024, oder concerning an application for a discretionary review (Rule 220.3 RoP)
Unconditional right to limit claims for damages (R. 263.3 RoP): An unconditional application to reduce the amount of damages claimed shall be considered as an unconditional application under Rule 263.3 RoP. Leave to limit a claim in an action unconditionally shall always be granted. Procedure for determining the value of the action (R. 22, 104,…
2 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
CoA Luxembourg, December 17, 2024, Application for suspensive effect, UPC_CoA_810/2024
Suspensive Effect of Appeal: The primary legal issue revolves around the suspensive effect of an appeal, specifically under Rule 223.4 RoP, which allows for suspensive effect in cases of extreme urgency. Requirement of Extreme Urgency: The Court emphasized that the applicant must demonstrate the existence of an extreme urgency to justify suspensive effect. In this…
3 min Reading time→ -
CoA Luxembourg, December 10, 2024, revocation of an order, UPC_CoA_470/2023
The revocation under Art. 75(1) UPCA and R. 242.1 RoP of an order of the Court of FirstInstance granting a provisional injunction will, as a general rule, have retroactive effect: As the decision of the CoA to revoke a first instance order means that the CoA finds this order should not have been made. Therefore…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, December 3, 2024, appeal decision on request for preliminary measures, UPC_CoA_297/2024
When the Court adjudicates on an application for provisional measures pursuant to R. 211.2 RoP in conjunction with Art. 62(4) UPCA, a sufficient degree of certainty (see also Art. 9(3) Directive 2004/48/EC) requires that the court considers on the balance of probabilities, that it is more likely than not, that the Applicant is entitled to…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, November 28, 2024, status as micro-enterprise, UPC_CoA_490/2024
Demonstrating status as a micro-enterprise: The Court of Appeal denied the request to waive the order to pay the regular court fee plus an additional fee of 50 % of the regular fee. The Appellant argued initially to be a micro-enterprise; then corrected its status to small enterprise. The Appellant failed to provide documentary evidence…
3 min Reading time→ -
CoA, November 29, 2024, order on relevant criteria for security for costs (R.158 RoP), UPC_CoA_548/2024
When deciding on a request for security for costs– failing any guarantees or other special circumstances, it is not relevant whether the claimant belongs to a – financially sound – group of companies. It is only the financial position of the claimant itself that is relevant;– it is not relevant whether a claimant is willing…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, November 27, 2024, Order on a request for discretionary review of an order on security for costs (R.220.3 RoP), UPC_CoA_651/2024
With this order, the Court of Appeal allows leave to appeal on the question whether the judge-rapporteur can decide alone on security for costs of a party and deny leave to appeal.: In the case at hand, the Mannheim Local Division ordered, with reference to Art. 69(4) UPCA and R.158 RoP, Claimant Total Semiconductor to…
2 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, November 21, 2024, decision on a request for a stay of proceedings, UPC_CoA_511/2024
Stay of proceedings is possible even if no final decision in Opposition is expected: Pursuant to Art. 33(10) UPCA and R. 295(a) RoP, the Court may stay proceedings relating to a patent which is also the subject of opposition proceedings before the EPO where a rapid decision may be expected from the EPO. These provisions…
5 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, November 21, 2024, Order, UPC_CoA_456/2024
Not every new argument constitutes an “amendment of a case” requiring a party to apply for leave under R. 263 RoP. : 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…
4 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, November 12, 2024, order concerning the jurisdiction of the Unified Patent Court (Art. 83 UPCA), UPC_CoA_489/2023, UPC_CoA_500/2023
If a patent has been opted out of the jurisdiction of the UPC, this opt-out can only be validly withdrawn, if no action according to Art. 32 UPCA concerning the relevant patent has commenced at a national court since June 1, 2023: The term “action” in Art. 83 UPCA refers not only to infringement and…
2 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, October 29, 2024, order, UPC_CoA_549/2024
Order on suspensive effect of appeal if impugned decision is evidently incorrect.: The suspensive effect may be ordered in particular if the order against which the appeal is directed is evidently incorrect. Whether there is an evident violation of the law is assessed on the basis of the factual findings and legal considerations that provide…
4 min Reading time→ -
CoA, October 21, 2024, Request for submission of new evidence, UPC_CoA_297/2024
New contradictory statements of the other party do not justify the submission of new evidence at appeal stage: Rule 222 of the Rules of Procedure (RoP) grants the Court of Appeal discretion to disregard new evidence not previously submitted to the Court of First Instance. In exercising this discretion, the Court considers: (a) whether the…
2 min Reading time→ -
CoA, October 15, 2024, order re. appeal against procedural order, CoA_PC_01/2024
Express Grant of Leave to Appeal Required: The Court emphasized that leave to appeal against a procedural order must be explicitly granted by the Court of First Instance (CFI) under Article 73 UPCA and Rule 220.2 RoP. The CFI’s general statement referencing Rule 220.2 RoP (“subject to appeal under the conditions laid down by the provisions of R. 220.2…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, September 30, 2024, Ordner in relation to R. 220.3 RoP and deadlines in R29(d) RoP, UPC_CoA_543/2024
Deadlines when Confidential Information are included: This decision clarifies that the deadline for a Defendant’s reply (in German “Duplik”) under Rule 29(d) RoP, when confidential information is involved, begins upon filing the initial Plaintiff’s reply, even if redacted. The Court of Appeal, while acknowledging differing practices across Local Divisions, found no misinterpretation of the RoP…
4 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, September 17, 2024, Order in appeal proceedings against a decision in first instance revocation proceedings, UPC_CoA_227/2024
Application of Articles 29 to 32 of the Brussels I recast Regulation concerning lis pendens: The CoA found that Articles 29 to 32 of the Brussels I recast Regulation apply during the transitional period defined in Article 83 UPCA, even if national proceedings commenced before this period. This interpretation aims to prevent conflicting decisions arising…
3 min Reading time→ -
CoA Luxembourg, September 24, 2024, order on request to produce evidence, UPC_CoA_298/2024, UPC_CoA_299/2024, UPC_CoA_300/2024
Both, claimant and defendant can rely on R. 190.1 RoP to request an order to produce evidence.: In view of the principle of equality of arms, Art. 59 UPCA and R. 190.1 RoP have a broader scope than the initial wording may suggest (evidence in support of its claims). The purpose of these provisions is…
4 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.