Topics: Art. 69 UPCA
-
LD Düsseldorf, January 29, 2026, Decision, UPC_CFI_571/2024
In bifurcated cases, a Local Division is bound by a Central Division’s decision amending patent claims, which then forms the basis for its infringement analysis: In a bifurcated setup, the Local Division hearing infringement cannot ignore amendments made by the Central Division in parallel revocation proceedings. Once the Milan Central Division amended EP 3 756…
5 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, December 24, 2025, Order concerning an application for leave to appeal against a cost decision, UPC-COA-0000911/2025
Appellate review of cost decisions is limited to a marginal review (Art. 69 UPCA, R. 221 RoP): The Court of Appeal only intervenes if awarded costs are beyond “reasonable and proportionate” or deviate from principles inherent in Art. 69 (1) UPCA and R. 150 et seqq. The Court of Appeal recognizes that the first-instance judge-rapporteur…
3 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
LD Brussels, December 4, 2025, decision on withdrawal of infringement action and recoverable costs, UPC_CFI_415/2025
As the Court previously held (cf. LD Düsseldorf – UPC_CFI_355/2025 and UPC_CFI_186/2025 – Fujifilm/Kodak), the focus of appropriateness “is primarily on the amount of costs incurred” and this from an ex ante perspective. When assessing these costs, elements which could be taken into consideration (having regard to the specifical circumstances of a withdrawal of an…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD The Hague, August 13, 2025, decision on the merits, UPC_CFI_327/2024
Cost decision on a counterclaim for revocation: If the patent is considered valid only in a form which is not claimed to be infringed, the patentee shall bear the costs of the counterclaim for revocation. However, if the counter claimant seeks revocation of claims not asserted against it, and those claims are upheld, a compensation…
4 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, July 3, 2025, procedural order on security for costs (R. 158 RoP), UPC_CFI_127/2024 et al
Even if the Defendant of an infringement action is, formally, at the same time the Claimant of a counterclaim for revocation, they are entitled to a security also for procedural costs caused by filing the counterclaim for revocation pursuant to Art. 69(4) UPCA and Rule 158.1 RoP.: According to the Court of Appeal’s decision in…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Lisbon, April 4, 2025, cost decision in PI proceedings, UPC_CFI_697/2024
Cost decision following an order rejecting a preliminary injunction: A decision on costs is possible following an order rejecting an application for a preliminary injunction (PI), although the strict wording of R. 150 et seq. RoP provide for a decision on costs only following a decision on the merits. Art. 69 (1-3) UPCA provides for…
2 min Reading time→ -
RD Nordic-Baltic, January 21, 2025, procedural order on costs for access to pleadings and evidence, UPC_CFI_380/2023
Key takeaway A member of the public does not bear the costs of a request for access to written pleadings and evidence: There is no legal basis for ordering a member of the public, who has made a request for access to written pleadings and evidence, to reimburse legal costs incurred by the parties to…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, December 3, 2024, Order re. procedural security against Defendant, UPC_CFI_140/2024
1. Not only the claimant but also the defendant may be ordered to provide security for legal costs within the meaning of R. 158 RoP.: (pp. 5 et seq.) Contrary to the Defendant´s position, this does not mean that Rule 158 RoP is in conflict with the UPCA. The power to order the provision of…
6 min Reading time→ -
LD, The Hague, February 13, 2024, Order, UPC_CFI_239/2023LD
Each party must bear its own legal costs until a final decision and cost order is made: Even if both parties are start-ups or SMEs, both parties have a limited cash-flow, are competitors of each other and the claimant has limited financial capacities, each party must bear its own legal costs until a final decision…
2 min Reading time→ -
CD Munich, 31 January 2024, order, UPC_CFI_252/2023
Further written submission following the interim conference to deal with a later filed document: Following the exchange of the written pleadings in accordance with Rule 43 RoP, the judge-rapporteur – after having informed the parties of his intention to do so – closed the written procedure pursuant to Rule 58 in connection with Rule 35…
3 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.