Topics: R. 354.4 RoP
-
Court of Appeal, Standing Judge, December 29, 2025, order regarding an application for suspensive effect, UPC-COA-0000936/2025
No “manifestly” erroneous decision if point of contention is a complex issue requiring in-depth-analysis: The Appellant argues that the impunged order of the LD Mannheim is based on the evidently incorrect assumption that a decision by the UK Court on a request for a court determined license by the Appellant would be equal to an…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, October 14, 2025, appeal against an order re. penalty payments, UPC_CoA_699/2025
System of penalties under the Rules of Procedure, specifics of a penalty order (R. 354.3, R.354.4 RoP): Pursuant to R. 354.3 RoP an order or decision may include an order for the forfeiture of a penalty sum in case of (future) non-compliance with an order (hereinafter: a penalty order). Although this must be considered the…
12 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
LD Mannheim, July 23, 2025, order on penalty payments, UPC_CFI_365/2023
Penalties should be proportionate to the value of the dispute and the level of non-compliance: The Court considered the proportionality of the penalties in relation to the value of the dispute (€15,000,000) and the defendants’ actions. The penalty system aims to encourage compliance while allowing for increasing sanctions for continued violations. Neither R. 354.3 or…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, 18 October 2023, order of penalty payment, UPC_CFI_177/2023
The amount of a penalty payment shall be determined (i) to take account of the creditor’s interest in the enforcement of the order not complied with by the debtor, and (ii) to deter the debtor from future violations. The penalty payment shall primarily be determined in view of the debtor and its (past) conduct: If…
5 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.