UPC CoA 118/2026

Vor dem UPC: Dolby Group (38 Verfahren)·Acer Group (11 Verfahren)

• 2026-08-05
  AppealÖffentlich

  Zusammenfassung: The Court of Appeal rejected Dolby's and Vectis' application for suspensive effect under R. 223 RoP and their requests to stay the first-instance proceedings, holding that the impugned order of the Local Division The Hague was not manifestly wrong. Dolby's appeal was held inadmissible because the impugned order did not adversely affect it, the operative part having ruled only on the admissibility of the counterclaim against Vectis.

  Rechtsfragen anzeigen (6)

  • suspensive effect (Art. 74(1) UPCA, R. 223 RoP)
  • stay of proceedings (R. 295 RoP)
  • admissibility of an appeal by a party not adversely affected (R. 220.1 RoP)
  • intervener treated as a party (R. 315.4 RoP)
  • addition of a party (R. 305 RoP)
  • time limit for a preliminary objection (R. 19.1 RoP)