UPC CFI, LD The Hague, 23 May 2025: Preliminary objections (partly) late filed, further dismissed or to be dealt with in the main proceedings (long-arm jurisdiction)
17-08-2025 Print this page
Procedural order on preliminary objections (R. 19 RoP, R. 20 RoP).
The PO’s filed on 24 April 2025 (…) on behalf of Moderna Belgium, Moderna Germany and Poland, are not admissible for these defendants (for Moderna Poland this only applies to action 192/25), as they are late filed and these defendants are therefore considered to submit to the jurisdiction and competence of the court and of the LD The Hague (R. 19.7 RoP).
Unsubstantiated objections by certain defendants to international jurisdiction of the UPC dismissed and these defendants are considered to submit to the jurisdiction of the UPC (R. 19.7 RoP) (Article 31 UPCA, Article 32 UPCA).
Jurisdiction regarding Moderna Poland, Moderna Norway and Spain because of allegation that Moderna Poland, Moderna Norway and Spain each not only infringe individually (asserting that jurisdiction can be based on Art. 7(2) BR), but that they also infringe the patent jointly with Moderna Netherlands in their home country. Therewith they infringe the same (national parts of a European) patent with the same product, which is enough connectivity to consider them co-defendants within the meaning of Art. 8(1) BR.
Competence of Local Division The Hague as local division where one of the defendants has its residence and given the commercial relationship between the multiple defendants and the same alleged infringement (Article 33(1)(b) UPCA). Lack of long-arm jurisdiction (extended beyond the UPC territory) is to be dealt with in the main proceedings.
