Rule 370 – Court fees

1. Court fees provided for in these Rules shall be paid in accordance with the provisions contained in this Part and the table of fees adopted by the Administrative Committee pursuant to Article 36 (3) of the Agreement (hereinafter: table of fees).

2. A fixed fee shall be paid in accordance with Section I (fixed fees) of the table of fees for the following actions at the Court of First Instance:

(a) Infringement action [Rule 15],

(b) Counterclaim for infringement [Rule 53],

(c) Action for declaration of non-infringement [Rule 70],

(d) Action for compensation for licence of right [Rule 80.3],

(e) Application to determine damages [Rule 132].

3. In addition to the fixed fee a value-based fee shall be paid in accordance with Section II (value-based fees) of the table of fees for those actions at the Court of First Instance set out in paragraph 2, which exceed a value of 500,000 EUR.

4. For the following procedures and actions at the Court of First Instance a fee shall be paid in accordance with Section III (other procedures and actions) of the table of fees adopted by the Administrative Committee:

(a) Revocation action [Rule 46],

(b) Counterclaim for revocation [Rule 26],

(c) Application for provisional measures [Rule 206.5],

(d) Action against a decision of the European Patent Office [Rule 88.3, 97.2],

(e) Application to preserve evidence [Rule 192.5],

(f) Application for an order for inspection [Rule199.2],

(g) Application for an order to freeze assets [Rule 200.2],

(h) Filing a protective letter [Rule 207.3],

(i) Application to prolong the period of a protective letter to be kept on the register [Rule.207.9],

(j) Application for rehearing [Rule 250],

(k) Application for re-establishment of rights [Rule 320.2],

(l) Application to review a case management order [Rule 333.3],

(m) Application to set aside decision by default [Rule 356.2].

5. For the following procedures at the Court of Appeal a fixed fee and, where applicable, a value based fee shall be paid in accordance with Section IV. of the table of fees:

(a) Appeal pursuant to Rule 220.1 (a) and (b) [Rule 228],

(b) Interlocutory appeal pursuant to Rule 220.1(c), appeal with leave of the Court of First Instance pursuant to Rule 220.2 or allowance by the Court of Appeal pursuant to Rule 220.4 or appeal of a cost decision with leave of the Court of Appeal pursuant to Rule 221.4 [Rule 228],

(c) Application for leave to appeal against cost decision pursuant to Rule 221 [Rule 228],

(d) Request for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 220.3, [Rule 228],

(e) Application for re-establishment of rights [Rule 320.2],

(f) Application to review a case management order pursuant to Rule 220.2 [R. 333.3],

(g) Application to set aside decision by default pursuant to Rule 357 [Rule 356.2],

(h) Application for rehearing pursuant to Rule 245.2 [Rule 250].

6. The assessment of the value of the relevant action in paragraphs 3 and 5 shall reflect the objective interest pursued by the filing party at the time of filing the action. In deciding on the value, the Court may in particular take into account the guidelines laid down in a decision of the Administrative Committee for this purpose.

7. If an action has more than one claimant and/or more than one defendant or if an action concerns a plurality of patents only one fixed fee and, if applicable, one value-based fee shall apply.

8. Small enterprises and micro-enterprises are required to pay only 60 % of the fees provided for in paragraphs 2 to 5 above (hereinafter: regular fees) subject to the following:

(a) In the Statement of claim or Counterclaim or in the application for a procedure or an appeal the party shall lodge with the Registry a notification in an electronic form in the language of the proceedings. In this notification the party shall provide an affirmation that he fulfils either the criteria of a “small enterprise” or a “micro-enterprise” as defined in Title I of the Annex to the Recommendation of the European Commission n° 2003/361 of 6 May 2003.

(b) If the requirements referred to above have not been met Rule 16.3 to .5 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

(c) The Court may, of its own motion, order the party to supply further documentation including any document relating to that party’s financial resources. The application shall be dealt with by the Court as soon as practicable.

(d) The Court may, at any time, of its own motion, and after having heard the party order payment of

(i) the remainder of the regular fee, in the event that payment of 60 % of the regular fees is manifestly disproportionate and unreasonable having regard to the financial capacity of the party;

(ii) the remainder of the regular fee plus an additional 50 % of that regular fee, if the affirmation provided by the party is found to be wholly or partially incorrect. An order for the payment of an additional fee pursuant to (i) and (ii) above shall state the reasons for such order.

(e) If the additional fee is not paid within the time limit set by the Court, a decision by default against the party shall be given by the Court pursuant to Rule 355.

9. Fixed and value-based fees may be reimbursed as follows:

(a) If the action is heard by a single judge [Rule 345.6.] the party liable for the Court fee will be reimbursed by 25 % of the fee.

(b) In case of the withdrawal of an action [Rule 265] the party liable for the Court fees will be reimbursed by:

(i) 60 % if the action is withdrawn before the closure of the written procedure

(ii) 40 % if the action is withdrawn before the closure of the interim procedure (iii) 20 % if the action is withdrawn before the closure of the oral procedure

(c) If the parties have concluded their action by way of settlement the party liable for the Court fees will be reimbursed by:

(i) 60 % if the action is settled before the closure of the written procedure

(ii) 40 % if the action is settled before the closure of the interim procedure

(iii) 20 % if the action is settled before the closure of the oral procedure

(d) Only one of the reimbursements referred to in paragraph 9 (a), (b) and (c) will apply per action and party. Where more than one reimbursement is applicable, the larger will be applied for each party.

(e) In exceptional cases, having regard, in particular, to the stage of the proceedings and the procedural behaviour of the party, the Court may deny or decrease the reimbursement payable according to paragraph 9 (b) and (c) of the aforementioned provisions.

10. If the amount of Court fees threatens the economic existence of a party who is not a natural person, and has presented reasonably available and plausible evidence to support that the amount of Court fees threatens its economic existence, the Court may upon request by that party, wholly or partially reimburse the fixed and value-based fee. In reaching a decision the Court shall reflect on all circumstances of the case including the procedural behaviour of the party. Before making such a decision the Court may give the other party an opportunity to be heard.

11. The party seeking reimbursement under paragraphs 9 and 10 shall lodge a reasoned Application for reimbursement to the Court. The Court shall deal with the application without delay and if satisfied that the reimbursement is appropriate shall direct the Registrar to make the payment as soon as practicable.

Case Law

IPPT20240501, UPC CFI, LD The Hague, Keestrack v Geha Laverman
Withdrawal of proceedings pursuant to a settlement (Rule 265 RoP, Rule 11 RoP). Restitution of part of the court fee appropriate. With the case being terminated at an early stage, i.e. after the issuance of the summons and before the filing of a reply by the respondent, and therefore before the 'written proceedings' are concluded, 60% of the court fees paid will be refunded (Rule 370.9(b) RoP). 

IPPT20230908, UPC CFI, RD Nordic-Baltic, Ocado v Autostore

Withdrawal of action prior to final decision because of settlement (Rule 265 RoP). Since the action has been withdrawn even before all defendants formally have been served the statement of claim, the Claimant shall be reimbursed court fees by 60 % of EUR 31.000, which is EUR 18.600. (Rule 370(9) RoP).

IPPT20230626, UPC CFI, LD Milan, Ocado v Autostore

Withdrawal of action prior to final decision because of settlement (Rule 265 RoP). Ocado reimbursed the amount of EUR 37,800, equal to 60% of the Court fees paid by it in these proceedings (Rule 370(9) RoP).