CD Milan, October 1, 2024, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI_380/2024

1. Key takeaways

High threshold for intervention in interim injunction proceedings

The Court rejected the request (here: from Menarini) for intervention, emphasizing that Article 313 RoP permits intervention in interim injunction proceedings only under exceptional circumstances. The mere fact that a third party might be affected by the outcome of the proceedings is not sufficient. Rather, the third party needs to demonstrate a direct legal interest that cannot be adequately protected otherwise.

Crucially, the Court found that Menarini's interests were already adequately represented in parallel proceedings before the LD Milan, where Menarini was a named party. Granting intervention in the CD case, the Court reasoned, would be redundant, potentially causing delays and opening the door for parties to use intervention to compensate for strategic omissions in parallel proceedings. Also, allowing intervention would pose a risk of divergent decisions. Hence, the Court