UPC CFI, LD Munich, 25 August 2025: No invalidity of withdrawal of opt-out for lack of mandate or power of representation
18-11-2025 Print this page
Preliminary objection rejected (R. 19 RoP). Lodged within one month of service, because, in the present case, the Statement of claim is deemed to have been served on the Defendants on the tenth day following posting, i.e. between 25 and 30 March 2024, in accordance with Rule 271.6 (b) RoP. Unfounded: the objections to the effectiveness of an opt-out or its withdrawal should be limited. Thus, the Defendant, who asserts the invalidity of a withdrawal of an opt-out in a Preliminary objection pursuant to Rule 19.1(a) RoP, can only object that the formal requirements of Rule 5.3 and 5.7 RoP have not been complied with, that the withdrawal has not been entered in the register or that the requirements of Rule 5.8 RoP are met. In particular, a mandate, a power of representation or any other authority for a representative acting under Rule 5.3 (b) (i) RoP is not required for an effective opt-out or its withdrawal. Unlike paragraph (ii), Rule 5.3 (b) (i) RoP does not require a mandate or any other substantive legal authority to represent.
