Rule 274 – Service outside the Contracting Member States

1. Where a Statement of claim is to be served outside the Contracting Member States, it shall be so served by the Registry

(a) by any method provided by:

(i) The law of the European Union on the service of documents in civil and commercial matters [Regulation (EU) 2020/1784] where it applies;

(ii) The Hague Service Convention or any other applicable convention or agreement where it applies; or

(iii) to the extent that there is no such convention or agreement in force, either by service through diplomatic or consular channels from the Contracting Member State in which the sub-registry of the relevant division is established;

(b) where service in accordance with paragraph 1(a) could not be effected by any method permitted by the law of the state where service is to be effected or as authorised by the Court under Rule 275.

2. No Statement of claim may be served under this Rule 274 in a manner which is contrary to the law of the state where service is effected.

3. The Registry shall inform the claimant of the date on which the Statement of claim is deemed served under paragraph 1.

4. The Registry shall inform the claimant if for any reason service pursuant to paragraph 1 cannot be effected.

Case law:

Court of Appeal

IPPT20240806, UPC CoA, Nera v Xiaomi
IPPT20240805, UPC CoA, Panasonic v Xiaomi
Statement of claim cannot be validly served on Xiaomi companies in China and Hong Kong at the business address of Xiaomi DE in Germany (Rule 273 - 274 RoP). No decision on costs by the Court of Appeal because the decision in appeal is not a final order or concluding an action (Rule 151 RoP, Rule 242(1) RoP)

Court of First Instance

IPPT20250121, UPC CFI, LD Munich, air up v Guangzhou Aiyun
Not necessary to attempt to serve decision by default in accordance with R. 274 RoP before an order that steps  taken is good service (R. 275.2 RoP) where the application for a provisional measure could not be served in accordance with R. 274 RoP and there is no indication that the decision by default can be served in accordance with R. 274 RoP. Pursuant to the principle of effective legal protection it must always be possible to establish good service, at least in accordance with R. 275.2 RoP . Consequently, neither the ordering nor the enforcement of provisional measures under Article 62 UPCA can be frustrated by the fact that an application for a preliminary injunction or a court order issued in accordance with such an application cannot be served.

IPPT20241212, UPC CFI, LD Hamburg, Hand Held Products v Scandit
Statement of claim of 6 November 2024 has been served on Swiss defendant on 20 November 2024 (R. 271.6 RoP, R. 274 RoP). Service on a defendant in Switzerland is subject to R. 274 RoP instead of R. 271.6 RoP as assumed by the CMS.

IPPT20240212, UPC CFI, LD Paris, ICPillar v ARM
Alternative method of service of Statement of Claim (Rule 275(1) RoP). As regards Poland service under section 1 or 2 could not be effected. Court authorizes three alternative methods, which appear to be good service and comply with the law of the country where service is to be effected (Rule 275(4) RoP), as they comply with the EU Service Regulation (EU 2020/1784). The date on which the Statement of Claim is deemed to have been served is the date of effective delivery of the letter to this defendant at his legal address.  As regards service in the United Kingdom the criteria under Rule 275(1) RoP […] are not met at this stage of the procedure. Service under Rule 274(1)(ii) ROP (Hague Service Convention) is still in progress and the delay of 10 days from the date of sending the registered letter is still reasonable. Therefore, the request under Rule 275(1) regarding service on the UK entities will be dismissed.