UPC CoA 305/2025

The Court of Appeal dismissed Rematec's application under R. 333 RoP for panel review of the rapporteur's order of 30 March 2026. The Court confirmed that the cost-assessment application under R. 151 RoP must be filed with the Local Division Mannheim (the court of first instance), not with the Court of Appeal, and that no extraordinary circumstances existed to justify otherwise. The Court also rejected Rematec's argument that R. 151 RoP is incompatible with the UPCA or EU law.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Rematec's application to have its costs-assessment request referred to the Court of First Instance with the filing date of the Court of Appeal treated as the CFI filing date. The Court held that it lacks jurisdiction over costs-assessment proceedings, which must always be initiated before the CFI under R. 150 ff. RoP, even when they concern appellate costs. No exceptional circumstances justifying a referral were found.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Rematec's application to have its cost decision application referred to the Court of First Instance (CFI) with the filing date backdated to 17 March 2026. The Court held that it lacks jurisdiction over cost decision applications, which must be filed before the CFI, and that no basis exists under the UPCA or Rules of Procedure for the requested referral.

Court of Appeal reversed the first instance decision, which had revoked the patent. The Court of Appeal upheld the patent's validity (rejecting the counterclaim for revocation), found patent infringement, and issued orders including a permanent injunction, recall, and destruction of infringing products. Provisional lump-sum damages of EUR 20,000 were awarded, with full damages to be determined in subsequent proceedings. (German-language version)

Court of Appeal reversed the first instance decision, which had revoked the patent. The Court of Appeal upheld the patent's validity (rejecting the counterclaim for revocation), found patent infringement, and issued orders including a permanent injunction, recall, and destruction of infringing products. Provisional lump-sum damages of EUR 20,000 were awarded, with full damages to be determined in subsequent proceedings. (English-language version)