Rule 248 – Obligation to raise objections

1. An Application for rehearing based on the ground of a fundamental procedural defect is only admissible where an objection in respect of the procedural defect was raised during the proceedings before the Court of First Instance or the Court of Appeal and dismissed by the Court, except where such objection could not have been raised during the proceedings before the Court of First Instance or the Court of Appeal.

2. An application for rehearing based upon the ground of a fundamental procedural defect is not admissible where the party could have brought an appeal in respect of the defect but failed to do so.

Case Law

Court of Appeal

IPPT20260224, UPC CoA, Suinno v Microsoft
Application for rehearing rejected (Article 81(1) UPCA; R. 245 RoP). Only fundamental procedural defects can be the basis for a rehearing. What Suinno has brought forward in its Applications is not sufficient to conclude that the Court of Appeal made an error, let alone one that must be considered a flaw of such a serious nature that it would constitute a fundamental error without which the same decision or order would not have been taken. According to R. 248.1 RoP, an Application for rehearing based on the ground of a fundamental procedural defect is only admissible where an objection in respect of the procedural defect was raised during the proceedings before the Court of First Instance or the Court of Appeal and dismissed by the Court, except where such objection could not have been raised during the proceedings before the Court of First Instance or the Court of Appeal.