Panel review confirms dismissal of Preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP, R. 333 RoP). Parent and subsidiary companies are not automatically “same parties” (Article 33(4) UPCA): depends on having the same or independent business activities. The assessment of the unity of the undertaking in the context of an antitrust action...

A party submitting a request to lay open books for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation pursuant to R. 213.2 RoP is liable for both the fixed fee and the value-based fee for the determination of damages (R. 132 RoP). Fees for compensation are not included in fees for provisional measures; they are...

Defence of abuse of rights can be considered by the UPC. Production of emails allegedly showing that the first claimant had acted, including the acquisition of […], with the aim of securing a dominant position in the SST market, and that the second claimant was aware that the […] l

Revocation of ex parte inspection order confirmed. Duty to disclose any known material fact which might influence the Court (R. 192.3 RoP). Is there so that the Court can take due account of the interests of both parties, in spite of having to rely only on the facts presented in the Application. Representatives are...

Provisional measures cease to have effect at the defendant's request if the applicant has not instituted proceedings within the period laid down in Article 9(5) of Directive 2004/48 [Enforcement Directive].  Article 9(5) Enforcement Directive covers a broad range of provisional measures and does not preclude...

Withdrawal of appeal by party consent (R. 265 RoP). Appellant ordered to bear the respondent’s costs. As a general rule, in the event of a withdrawal of an appeal, the appellant shall be considered to be the unsuccessful party and shall bear the costs incurred in relation to the appeal proceedings

Application filed with the Court of Appeal for the determination of costs dismissed. (R. 150 RoP). Proceedings for cost determination under R. 150 ff. RoP must be initiated before the Court of First Instance (-=CFI), even where they relate to appeal costs. This also applies where the application relates exclusively or...

Revocation decision set aside (Article 65 UPCA), infringement found in appeal (Article 25 UPCA). Final decision in appeal (Article 75 UPCA, R. 242.2(b) RoP). The Court of Appeal, must, in order to issue a final decision, as a rule decide not only on the counterclaim for revocation but also render a final decision on...

Finding of infringement set aside (Article 25 UPCA). Functional claim interpretation “housing longitudinally fixed to an upper side of drive unit, so as to […]” (Article 69 EPC). According to the wording of the claim, the feature according to which the housing has to be longitudinally fixed to an upper side of the...

Application to revoke security for costs order rejected (Article 69(4) UPCA, R. 158 RoP, R. 336 RoP). Article 69(4) UPCA does not only apply to cases referred to in Art. 59-62 UPCA. […]. Nor does Art. 69(4) UPCA suggest that the requirement to provide security for costs should be the exception. The purpose of security...

€ 600.000 security for costs to be provided by appellant Suinno (Article 69(4) UPCA). Failure to pay previously awarded costs supports the conclusion that recovery of future costs is at risk. Lack of evidence of sufficient financial resources reinforces the need for security for costs. A counterclaim for revocation...

€ 75.000 security for costs against Chinese domiciled applicant. Even if the party is solvent, enforcement difficulties alone justify security. An order for security for costs can only be made against applicants, not in their favour (Article 69(4) UPCA). An ‘applicant’ is the party who initiates legal proceedings by...

Injunction granted for (partly uncontested) infringement claim (Article 25 UPCA). Parent company liability (Article 25 UPCA).Parent company liability (Article 25 UPCA). Defendant 4 could put an end to the infringing acts of Defendant 3 on the basis of its power to control and instruct its subsidiaries, but did not do...

Revocation action dismissed (Article 65 UPCA). Inventive step (Article 56 EPC). A realistic starting point, in the opinion of the Court, is typically a prior art disclosure as a whole. Absent a specific reason or pointer in the disclosure itself (or based on common general knowledge) to do so, the selection of a...

Request for extension of time period for filing Statement of appeal which has not yet started rejected (R. 9.4 RoP, R. 224.1(a) RoP). It follows from R. 9.4 RoP that the Court shall not extend the time period for the Statement of appeal. It can be left open, whether it follows that after the time period for lodging the...

IPPT20260116, UPC CFI LD Paris, IMC Creations v Mul-T-Lock 
Unitary patent valid (Article 65 UPCA) and infringed (Article 25 UPCA). Permanent injunction granted.(Article 63 UPCA)  Inventive step - common general knowledge of the skilled person (Article 56 EPC) Documents not part of common general knowledge : Document no...

Appeal against order imposing penalties inadmissible. (Article 69 UPCA,  Art. 82(4) UPCA, Rule 354.4 RoP). Appealable decisions (Rule 220 RoP) Orders imposing penalty payments do not fall under Article 73(2)(a) UPCA or Rule 220.1 RoP, an appeal against such orders is only admissible if leave to appeal is granted...

Order for security for costs set aside in light of litigation insurance (Article 69(4) UPCA, Rule 158.1 RoP) . Careful consideration of the terms of a litigation insurance policy is of particular relevance to demonstrate the financial position of party. The insurance obtained by the appellant provided adequate security...

Preliminary injunction granted . (Article 62(1) UPCA ,  Rule 209 RoP, Rule 211 RoP) . Infringement is assumed. Late filed non infringement arguments submitted in the rejoinder. (Article 25 (a)UPCA, Rule 52 RoP). Claim interpretation (Article 69 EPC) Defendants disagreement with claim interpretation applied by the EPO...

Request to stay first instance proceedings pending appeal dismissed. (Rule 21.2 RoP) No exceptional circumstances. The mere fact that, the preliminary objection relates to a question of jurisdiction which has never been decided by the court and has triggered a high amount of controversial discussion among scholars...