- Verfahrensdetails
- Status—VerfahrensartKostenfestsetzungKategorieKostenfestsetzungen
- Parteien
- Kläger
- Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd.Unternehmen
- Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd.Unternehmen
Vertreter- Bolko Ehlgen-Linklaters LLP
- Julia Schönbohm-Linklaters LLP
- Dipl.-Phys. Olaf Isfortmitwirkend-Schneiders & Behrendt
Beklagte- expert e-Commerce GmbHUnternehmen
- expert klein GmbHUnternehmen
Vertreter- Dirk Jestaedt-Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben
- Bernhard Ganahlmitwirkend-HGF Europe LLP
- Division
- Dusseldorf LD
- Richter
- —
- Technologie
- Electrical engineeringSemiconductors
- Sprache
- —
- Erste Entscheidung
- 10. Apr. 2026
| Median Tage bis zur ersten Entscheidung | |
|---|---|
| Gesamt-UPC | 124 |
| Dusseldorf LD | Gesperrt |
Vor dem UPC: Seoul Semiconductor Group (29 Verfahren)·expert e-Commerce GmbH (14 Verfahren)
Dieser Streit umfasst 16 weitere Verfahren
UPC CoA 380/2025·UPC CFI 823/2024·UPC CFI 824/2024·UPC CFI 677/2024·UPC CoA 762/2024 und 11 weitere
1 weitere Beklagte zum selben oder einem verwandten Patent
Starten Sie die kostenlose Testphase, um die Ausgänge zu sehen.
Weitere Verfahren: Dusseldorf LD·2025
- 2026-04-10Application For CostsÖffentlich
Zusammenfassung: The court partly granted the defendants' application for a costs order following the appeal court's reversal of the first-instance judgment and its award of costs to the defendants. The claimant was ordered to repay previously reimbursed first-instance costs (31,982.85 EUR each to defendants 1 and 2 for the infringement action, and 51,112.73 EUR to defendant 2 for the nullity counterclaim), pay first-instance costs of 111,353.33 EUR, and pay appeal costs of 61,019.47 EUR; the request for a higher appeal costs figure based on the first-instance agreement was rejected.
Rechtsfragen anzeigen (4)
- Recoverability of costs already paid under a first-instance costs order that is subsequently invalidated by an appeal decision amending the underlying costs liability ruling (R. 151 RoP)
- Scope of a first-instance cost-sharing agreement: whether it extends to appeal proceedings
- Assessment of reasonable and proportionate representation costs under Art. 69 UPCA and R. 152 RoP
- Recoverability of travel and accommodation costs with supporting evidence
- Entscheidung%20Kostenfestsetzungsantrag_signed%20%281%29.pdf2026-04-10DE
Amounts already reimbursed by defendants under the original first-instance costs decision are recoverable in the post-appeal costs proceedings, because the appeal court's reversal of the costs liability ruling deprived the original costs decision of its legal basis.
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: R. 151 RoP; Art. 69 UPCAThe parties' first-instance agreement to recognise 100,000 EUR as recoverable representation costs (split 50/50 between the infringement action and the nullity counterclaim) governs first-instance costs and the defendants are entitled to rely on it.
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: First-instance oral hearing agreement; R. 152 RoPActual appeal-instance representation costs of 59,975.95 EUR (attorneys' fees) are reasonable, proportionate, and below the reimbursement ceiling, so they should be awarded in full.
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Art. 69 UPCA; R. 152 RoPTravel and accommodation costs of 353.33 EUR for the first instance are reasonable and supported by documentary evidence.
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: R. 151 RoP
The first-instance cost-sharing agreement should also apply to the appeal proceedings, entitling defendants to 122,000 EUR for appeal costs.
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: First-instance oral hearing agreementRepayment of costs already reimbursed under the original costs decision cannot be claimed via a costs application.
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 69 UPCA; R. 151 RoP