Rule 224 – Time periods for lodging the Statement of appeal and the Statement of grounds of appeal

1. A Statement of appeal shall be lodged by the appellant:

(a) within two months of service of a decision referred to in Rule 220.1(a) and (b); or

(b) within 15 days of service of an order referred to in Rule 220.1 (c) or a decision referred to in Rule 220.2 or 221.3.

2. The Statement of grounds of appeal shall be lodged by the appellant:

(a) within four months of service of a decision referred to in Rule 220.1(a) and (b); or

(b) within 15 days of service of an order referred to in Rule 220.1(c) or a decision referred to in Rule 220.2 or 221.3.

Relation with Agreement: Article 73(1) and (2)

Case Law:

IPPT20240411, UPC CoA, Neo Wireless v Toyota
Time period for lodging appeal against procedural order’ (Rule 220(2) RoP, Rule 224(1)(a) RoP)
If an appeal is lodged against a ‘procedural order’ under Rule 220(2) RoP and leave (i) is granted in the impugned order itself, the Statement of appeal must be lodged within 15 days of service of that order containing the decision to grant leave. If the decision to grant leave to appeal (ii) is contained in a separate order on a request to that effect (which separate order must be issued within 15 days of the impugned order, cf R.220(3) RoP), the Statement of appeal has to be lodged within 15 days from the date of service of this separate order containing the decision to grant leave to appeal.

IPPT20240226, UPC CoA, AIM Sport v Supponor
Parties requested to comment on non-compliance with Rule 224.1(b) RoP, providing that a Statement of Appeal of an order has to be filed within 15 days of service of an order referred to in Rule 220.1(c) RoP. Under “Information about Appeal” the CFI has indicated that the decision could be appealed within two months of the date of notification of the decision, referring to Article 73(1) UPCA and Rule 220.1(a) and Rule 224.1(a) RoP concerning an appeal against a decision, such as a decision in an infringement action, while in one of the two actions AIM sought a preliminary injunction order pursuant to Article 62 UPCA.

IPPT20231218, UPC CoA, OPPO v Panasonic 

IPPT20231219, UPC CoA, OPPO v Panasonic

IPPT20231220, UPC CoA, OPPO v Panasonic
Requests by Appellant for shortening the time period for filing the Statement of response by Respondent in appeal rejected; disproportionate to the time the Appellant has itself taken for the Statement of appeal (Rule 9 RoP, Rule 224 RoP). Request for expedition of appeal by Appellant after having used full 15 days for Statement of appeal, which would give Respondent only 4 working days to respond, and would require the Court of Appeal to decide the case on the very same day, without the opportunity to hear the parties, (i) insufficiently takes into account the interests of the Respondent to be given sufficient time to properly prepare its Statement of response and (ii) would be contrary to the principles of proportionality, fairness and equity.