UPC CFI, LD The Hague, 25 september 2024: No unconditional access to evidence seized with an ex parte order:

16-01-2025 Print this page
Auteur:
Mzolisi Mtshaulana
IPPT20240925, UPC CFI, LD The Hague, DDT v Doytec

Ex parte order to preserve evidence (R. 197 RoP, Article 60(5) UPCA). Demonstrable risk of evidence being no more available once the SMT exhibition is over, for Doytec is based abroad and the technical and commercial documentation relating to C-1012 machine could easily be destroyed or otherwise ceasing to be available. 

 

The appointed expert (R. 196.5 RoP) shall lodge a written report, together with a full copy of all the documents acquired as a result of the execution of the measures, immediately and no later than two days after the completion of execution of the measures. 

 

The granting of an application for preservation of evidence or inspection of premises does not imply an unconditional order to disclose the evidence to the applicant (Article 60(1) UPCA). Pursuant to Article 60(1) UPCA the order must be subject to the protection of confidential information. Where the evidence may contain confidential information, this entails that the Court must hear the other party before deciding whether and to what extent to disclose the evidence to the applicant. In this context, the Court must give the other party access to the evidence and must provide that party with the opportunity to request the Court to keep certain information confidential and to provide reasons for such confidentiality.

 

IPPT20240925, UPC CFI, LD The Hague, DDT v Doytec