Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 DECEMBER 2024

CD Paris, December 18, 2024, Decision In Revocation Action, UPC_CFI_454/2023

Bardehle Pagenberg
Bardehle Pagenberg
Contributor
Bardehle Pagenberg

Bardehle Pagenberg

IP practitioners with technical expertise As one of Europe’s leading IP law firms, BARDEHLE...

View firm profile
Explore more from Bardehle Pagenberg

Even if a standstill provision requiring pre-suit notification is breached, this does not affect the Court's jurisdiction or the admissibility of the action.

GermanyIntellectual Property

1. Key takeaways

Standstill provisions do not impact UPC's jurisdiction

Even if a standstill provision requiring pre-suit notification is breached, this does not affect the Court's jurisdiction or the admissibility of the action. The Court emphasized that access to justice is a fundamental right (Art. 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU), but that such a breach may have contractual implications.

Front-loaded proceedings are crucial

The Court highlighted again the principle of 'front-loaded' proceedings by excluding late-filed prior art (documents 'Menot' and 'Lieberman') and invalidity arguments. This emphasizes the importance of Rules 13 and 44 RoP, requiring parties to present their complete case early on for procedural efficiency and fairness.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from