Übersicht · Eingereicht: 11. Sept. 2024
UPC_CoA_523/2024
HERBICIDE COMPOSITIONS
BerufungenHauptberufungCourt of AppealAppealCase Closed
Dieser Fall zitiert
In den Entscheidungen dieses Falls zitierte Quellen.
Keine Zitate aus den Entscheidungen dieses Falls extrahiert.
Zitiert in
Spätere UPC-Entscheidungen, die diesen Fall zitieren.
| Zitiert in | Datum | Rechtsfrage | Bindungskraft | Auszug |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UPC_APP_21951/2025 Court of Appeal | 21. Mai 2025 | security for enforcement is discretionary; defendant must raise at first instance | Bindend | see EPG CoA, Order of 3 March 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024, APL_51115/2024, Sumi/Syngenta, para. 112 and 114 |
| ACT_14764/2025 Hamburg LD | 16. Juni 2025 | security discretion in inter partes provisional measures | Bindend | (CoA, Order of 3 March 2025, UPC-CoA_523/2024, para 110 – Sumi Agro v Syngenta) |
| UPC_APP_20809/2025 Court of Appeal | 24. Dez. 2025 | procedural | Bindend | Filip Alois J. De Corte and Dr. Christopher Andrews, European patent attorneys (Syngenta Crop Protection AG) PATENT AT ISSUE EP 2 152 073 Appeal n°: UPC_CoA_523/2024 2 PANEL AND DECIDING JUDGES Klaus Grabinski, Presiding judge and |
| UPC_APP_20809/2025 Court of Appeal | 24. Dez. 2025 | FRAND | Bindend | d request of both parties, the Judge-Rapporteur ordered on 29 July 2025 a stay of the proceedings in respect of the application for a rehearing App_20809/2025 UPC_CoA_523/2024 until 30 September 2025 and allowed both parties to ask for an extension |
| UPC_CoA_930/2025 Court of Appeal | 18. März 2026 | jurisdiction | Bindend | see decision of 19 December 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024, Docket Navigator, paragraphs 18-19 with references |
| UPC_CFI_553/2025 Hamburg LD | 21. Okt. 2025 | cost decision justified in inter partes provisional measures proceedings | Überzeugend | According to the case law of the Court of Appeal (Order of 3 March 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024 – Sumi Agro/Syngenta; Order of 6 August 2024, UPC_CoA_335/2024, 10x Genomics/NanoString) |
| UPC_CFI_387/2025 Hamburg LD | 14. Aug. 2025 | cost decision should be issued in inter partes PI proceedings | Bindend | The Court is of the opinion, like the Court of Appeal (Order of 3 March 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024 – Sumi Agro v. Syngen-ta; Order of 6 August 2024, UPC_CoA_335/2024, 10x Genomics et al v. NanoString), that a cost decision should be issued in inter pa... |
| UPC_CFI_387/2025 Hamburg LD | 14. Aug. 2025 | cost decision should be issued in inter partes PI proceedings | Bindend | The Court is of the opinion, like the Court of Appeal (Order of 3 March 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024 – Sumi Agro v. Syngen-ta; Order of 6 August 2024, UPC_CoA_335/2024, 10x Genomics et al v. NanoString), that a cost decision should be issued in inter pa... |
| UPC_CFI_612/2024 Paris LD | 24. Okt. 2025 | claim construction — patentee must show undisclosed function more probable than not to skilled person | Bindend | le demandeur ne peut se contenter d'affirmer que l'interprétation de l'invention est évidente pour l'homme du métier qui aurait pu aboutir à une telle conclusion. [...] son allégation est plus vraisemblable, qu'invraisemblable (UPC_CoA_523/2024, décision du 3 mars 2025). |
| UPC_CoA_464/2024 Court of Appeal | 25. Nov. 2025 | jurisdiction — territorial scope of injunction after Romania accession | Abgegrenzt | Edwards' reference to the Court of Appeal's order in the case of Syngenta v Sumi Agro (UPC_CoA_523/2024, order of 3 March 2025) cannot alter that assessment. |