389 results found

It is a reason for a term extension if wrong exhibits to which reference is made in the Statement of claim have been made available via the CMS

We last provided an overview of the current status of the diesel scandal back in September 2021 and showed that the legal process is still ongoing even years after public disclosure of the allegations.

The Court permitted the withdrawal requested by the claimant and consented to by the defendant, as no final decision had been made.

The UPC’s “inherent” jurisdiction to ensure its effectiveness: The jurisdiction extends to the abusive use of divisional applications. In revocation proceedings or actions for declaration of non-infringement, the court may decline to dispose of the action (Rule 360 RoP) and determine that a patent lacked inventive step, notwithstanding its withdrawal by the patentee

Mit den im Anhang im deutschen Original sowie in englischer Übersetzung beigefügten „Hinweisen zur Handhabung des kartellrechtlichen Zwangslizenzeinwandes nach Huawei v. ZTE innerhalb des Münchener Verfahrens in Patentstreitsachen"...

Bei der Beurteilung, wann die Zuerkennung eines Ausgleichsanspruchs dem Gebot der materiellen Gerechtigkeit entspricht, sind auch die Gründe zu berücksichtigen, aus denen der Anspruchsteller von einer eigenen Nutzung...

In its judgment of 20 December 2017 (C-393/16) concerning the use of "Champagner Sorbet", the CJEU established, for the first time, principles for the use of a protected designation of origin...

When exercising its discretion under R. 222.2 RoP, the CoA weighs the justification for the late submission, its relevance to the appeal, and the position of the opposing party. A party must explain why the evidence could not have been submitted in the first instance. The mere fact that assembling the evidence took time is insufficient where the party had ample opportunity to do so beforehand.

The Court, when exercising its discretion under Art. 69(4) UPCA and R.158 RoP, must determine, in light of the facts and arguments brought forward by the parties, whether the financial position of the Claimant gives rise to a legitimate and real concern ...

A connection joinder pursuant to R. 340 RoP cannot result in the referral of an action to another division of the Court of First Instance beyond the possibilities provided for referral of actions in Art. 33 UPCA.

The Court of Appeal can grant suspensive effect to an order pursuant to R. 220.2 RoP as Art. 74 UPCA prevails over R. 223.5 RoP.

Pursuant to Art. 75(1) UPCA, where the CoA sets aside a decision of the CFI, it shall, as a rule...

Revocation actions and counterclaims for revocation are treated as separate actions, even if jointly decided in a single document by the Court of First Instance. Each action requires its own appeal fee.

Market data from providers requiring confidentiality qualifies as confidential information under R. 262.2, R. 262A.1 RoP and Art. 58 UPCA, extending beyond trade secrets per Art. 39(2) TRIPS

New facts and evidence on appeal face a strict admissibility threshold under Art. 73(4) UPCA and R. 222.2 RoP. The Court considers three factors: (a) whether the party can justify that the submissions could not reasonably have been made at first instance, (b) the relevance of the new submissions, and (c) the position of the other party.

Not every new argument constitutes an "amendment of a case" requiring a party to apply for leave under R. 263 RoP.

Injunctions are not subject to the five-year limitation period under Art. 72 UPCA — no time bar applies to injunctive relief.