UPC CFI, LD Dusseldorf, 21 May 2025: No security for costs - not unduly burdensome to enforce a cost order in the US

No security for costs (R. 158 RoP, Article 69 UPCA). 

Also the claimant is permitted to submit a request for security for costs, as this rule does not restrict such actions to a defendant only. 

It is sufficient for a defendant to establish that enforcement of a cost order is unduly burdensome. The burden of showing this is on the applicant of an order for security for costs. To this end, the applicant shall not only provide evidence as to the foreign law applicable in the territory where the order shall be enforced, but also its application. The Defendants have not provided evidence of the applicable foreign law, just an argument about such, nor have they provided evidence about the application of such law. The Claimant argues that the enforcement of UPC orders and decisions is not unduly burdensome in the United States of America. 

The Court notes that, according to the UPC case law, US courts routinely recognise and enforce judgments of foreign courts

IPPT20250521, UPC CFI, LD Düsseldorf, Hologic v Siemens