Rule 43 – Exchange of written pleadings (revocation action)

Print this page

1. The written procedure shall consist of:

(a) the lodging of a Statement for revocation (by the claimant) [Rule 44]; and

(b) the lodging of a Defence to revocation (by the defendant) [Rule 49]; and optionally

(c) the lodging of a Reply to the Defence to revocation (by the claimant) [Rule 51];

(d) the lodging of a Rejoinder to the Reply (by the defendant) [Rule 52].

2. The Defence to revocation may include:

(a) an Application to amend the patent; and

(b) a Counterclaim for infringement by the proprietor of the patent.

3. If an Application to amend the patent is lodged, the claimant shall lodge a Defence to the Application to amend the patent. The defendant may lodge a Reply to the Defence to the Application. The claimant may lodge a Rejoinder to the Reply. The Rejoinder shall be limited to a response to the matters raised in the Reply.

4. If a Counterclaim for infringement is lodged, the claimant shall lodge a Defence to the Counterclaim for infringement [Rule 56], the defendant may lodge a Reply to the Defence to the Counterclaim [Rule 56.3] and the claimant may lodge a Rejoinder to the Reply [Rule 56.4].

5. Rule 12.5 shall apply.

 

Case Law:

 

IPPT20240124, UPC CFI, CD Munich, Sanofi-Aventis v Amgen
No automatic right for Claimant to reply to Rejoinder by Defendant (Rule 12 RoP, Rule 43 RoP). Generally, fixed framework of written submissions and front-loaded character of the UPC proceedings designed to conduct UPC proceedings in an efficient, proportionate, fair and equitable way. Request allowable: a bona fide attempt to respond concisely to new points made for the first time in the last written submission. No right Defendant to react to reply: right to be heard does not entail that there should be yet another exchange between the parties. Defendant has the right to be heard at the oral hearing. 

Back