UPClytics
Alle Fälle anzeigen

UPC APP 28639/2025

·EP3918974: COMPUTERIZED REFRACTION AND ASTIGMATISM DETERMINATION

Verfahrensdetails
Status
Verfahrensart
Verfahrensantrag
Kategorie
Verfahrensführungsanordnungen
Parteien
Kläger
Vertreter: Marc Grunwald (Peterreins Schley); Malte Frese (Hemmer Lindfeld Frese)
Beklagte
Vertreter: Wim Maas (Taylor Wessing)
Division
Court of Appeal
Richter
Technology
Pharmaceutical & Medical
Sprache
Erste Entscheidung
26. Juni 2025
Entscheidungen
  • 2025-06-26
    Application Rop 223

    The Court of Appeal (Panel 2: Kalden, Rombach, Simonsson) granted suspensive effect to the managing director's appeal and provisionally granted suspensive effect to the Easee companies' appeal pending clarification of their representation authority (following insolvency), against the Hamburg Local Division's order requiring Easee to provide security for legal costs of EUR 75,000 for the revocation counterclaim proceedings. The court found the managing director's arguments on the impermissibility of security for costs for defendants in revocation proceedings raised an obvious legal error.

    Rechtsfragen:Suspensive effect of appeal against security for costs order (R. 223 RoP)Security for costs in revocation counterclaim proceedings (R. 158 RoP)Representation authority during insolvency of appellantObvious legal error threshold for suspensive effect
Dokumente
  • Order%20suspensive%20effect26-06%20anonymized.pdf2025-06-26ENGLISH