UPC CFI, LD Milan, 10 February 2026 : Appeal against a CFI upholding a counterclaim for revocation has automatic suspensive effect.
30-03-2026 Print this page
Appeal against a CFI upholding a counterclaim for revocation has automatic suspensive effect. Stay of proceedings ordered. (Article 74(2) UPCA, Rule. 150 RoP, Rule 295 RoP).
The automatic suspensive effect applies to the decision in its entirety, including the parts relating to legal costs. (Article 69 UPCA)
Interpretation that “the automatic suspensive effect provided by law would be limited solely to the provisions of the decision relating strictly to the validity of the patent” introduces an arbitrary limitation that would exclude any suspensive effect relating to other points of the decision, including those relating to legal costs not contemplated by the provision’s wording.
The court deviates from the decision in CD Paris, dated 29.4.2025 (Roche Diabetes v Tandem Diabetes), the aforementioned decision did not consider the applicability of Article 74(2) UPCA at all.
And refers to order of LD Brussels dated 2.5.2025 ( OrthoApnea ) where the Court determined that it was permissible to stay the proceedings for cost determination, even in cases where the automatic and mandatory suspensive effect stipulated in Article 74(2) UPCA does not apply.
