UPC Analytics
DEEN
Übersicht · Eingereicht: 30. Mai 2025

UPC_CFI_479/2025

PIECE OF FURNITURE IN WHICH A WASHING MACHINE CAN BE PLACED AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURE THEREOF

Einstweilige MaßnahmenEinstweilige MaßnahmenThe Hague LDProvisional measuresCase Closed
ÜbersichtEntscheidungenBegründungZitateDokumenteZeitverlauf
Abdeckung: Teilweise.Begründung teilweise extrahiert — einige Abschnitte können unvollständig sein.
Zusammenfassung in einfacher Sprache

Washtower IP B.V. and Washtower B.V. obtained a preliminary injunction from The Hague Local Division against IBBH, BEGA Consult, BEGA BBK, and NEG Novex (Defendants 2-5) for infringement of EP 3 522 755 B1, covering washing machine cabinet furniture. The Court found the Laundreezy and Respekta Clara cabinets more likely than not infringing, and ordered injunctions, recall, and supply-chain information disclosure across all UPC states, with EUR 56,000 in legal costs awarded jointly against the defendants.

Angenommene Argumente
Was das Gericht akzeptiert hat — nach Partei.

  • Defendants' Laundreezy and Respekta Clara washing machine cabinets fall within the scope of EP 3 522 755 B1

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62 UPCA; R. 206 RoP

    Hinweis: Court found it more likely than not that both product lines infringe the patent, granting injunctions against Defendants 2-5.

  • Urgency and necessity for provisional measures to stop ongoing infringement

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62(1) UPCA; R. 206 RoP

    Hinweis: Court accepted urgency and granted injunction covering all UPC Contracting Member States.

  • Information order necessary to stop further infringement (supply chain disclosure)

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: R. 354 RoP; Art. 62 UPCA

    Hinweis: Court granted information orders on origin and distribution channels but limited scope to cessation of infringement, not damages calculation.

  • Recall order warranted to retrieve infringing products from professional customers

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62 UPCA

    Hinweis: Court ordered a recall letter to all professional customers in UPC Contracting Member States.

Zurückgewiesene Argumente
Was das Gericht nicht akzeptiert hat — und warum.

  • Information order extending to prices and numbers of cabinets sold (for damages calculation)

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62 UPCA; R. 206 RoP

    Begründung: Court found no urgency or necessity for disclosure of commercial data relating to damages quantification at the provisional measures stage.

Zentrale Rechtsgrundsätze
In der Begründung herangezogene Doktrinen und Regeln.
urgency and necessity for provisional measurespreliminary assessment of infringement (more likely than not)scope of information orders limited to cessation of infringementjoint and several liability of defendants for costsrecall orders as provisional measure

Weitere Fälle zu diesem Grundsatz ansehen.

Hinweise zur Anspruchsauslegung

No specific claim construction disputes are recorded in the excerpt. The Court applied EP 3 522 755 B1 claim scope to both the Laundreezy and Respekta Clara products and found them to fall within it.