Overview · Filed: —
APL_32347/2024
Radio Communication Device and Radio Communication Method
AppealsMain AppealCourt of AppealAppeal RoP220.1—
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.
Rules of Procedure · 6
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 190 | request for production of evidence — FRAND defence | Binding | Ein Beklagter kann sich auf R.190.1 VerfO berufen, um eine Anordnung zur Vorlage von (Gegen-)Beweismitteln zu beantragen. |
| 334 | case management — order in which issues decided | Binding | Zu den Verfahrensleitungsbefugnissen des Berichterstatters, des Vorsitzenden Richters oder des Spruchkörpers gehört auch die Festlegung der Reihenfolge, in der über die Streitpunkte zu entscheiden ist (R.334(e) VerfO) |
| Preamble 7 RoP | complex actions may require more time and procedural steps | Binding | dies stimmt mit Präambel 7 VerfO überein, die anerkennt, dass komplexe Verfahren möglicherweise mehr Zeit und Verfahrensschritte erfordern |
| 190 | request for production of evidence — FRAND defence | Binding | A defendant can rely on R.190.1 RoP to request an order to produce (counter-)evidence. |
| 334 | case management — order in which issues decided | Binding | The margin of discretion includes decision-making on the request in accordance with what the judge-rapporteur, the presiding judge or the panel has decided regarding the order in which issues are to be decided pursuant to R.334(e) RoP. |
| Preamble 7 RoP | complex actions may require more time and procedural steps | Binding | in conformity with Preamble 7 of the Rules which recognizes that complex actions may require more time and procedural steps |
Court of Justice EU · 5
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| C-57/21 | proportionality in evidence disclosure — competition law | Persuasive | hat die nationalen Gerichte verpflichtet sind, die Offenlegung von Beweismitteln auf das strikt relevante, verhältnismäßige und erforderliche Maß zu beschränken (Urteil vom 12. Januar 2023, RegioJet, C-57/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:6, Rn. 72) |
| C-312/21 | national court discretion under Art. 5(1) Directive 2014/104 | Persuasive | die freie Würdigung durch das nationale Gericht im Hinblick auf Art. 5(1) der Richtlinie 2014/104 hervorgehoben (Urteil vom 16. Februar 2023, Tráficos Manuel Ferrer, C-312/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:99, Rn. 46) |
| C-163/21 | strict review of relevance, proportionality and necessity in evidence requests | Persuasive | the CJEU has essentially pointed out the need for a strict review by the national courts, with a rigorous examination of the request, as regards the relevance of the evidence requested (Judgment of 10 November 2022, PACCAR and Others, C-163/21 ECLI:EU:C:2022:863, para 64) |
| C-57/21 | limiting disclosure to strictly relevant, proportionate and necessary evidence | Persuasive | the CJEU, when interpreting the provision in the context of an ongoing investigation by a competition authority, has held that national courts are required to limit the disclosure of evidence to that which is strictly relevant, proportionate and necessary (Judgment of 12 January 2023, RegioJet, C-57/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:6, para 72) |
| C-312/21 | national court discretion in evidence disclosure under Directive 2014/104 | Persuasive | The absolute discretion of the national court has also been underlined in relation to Article 5(1) of Directive 2014/104 (Judgment of 16 February 2023, Tráficos Manuel Ferrer, C-312/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:99, para 46) |
courtName.other · 5
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| C/2020/4829 | protection of confidential information in private competition law enforcement | Background | vgl. die Mitteilung über den Schutz vertraulicher Informationen durch nationale Gerichte in Verfahren zur privaten Durchsetzung des EU-Wettbewerbsrechts, C/2020/4829, Rn. 12 |
| Directive 2014/104/EU | disclosure of evidence in private antitrust enforcement | Background | betreffend: Anträge auf Anordnung der Beweisvorlage (R.190 VerfO) |
| Directive 2014/104/EU Art. 5 | disclosure of evidence in private competition law enforcement | Persuasive | way of comparison, to the case-law of the CJEU on disclosure of evidence in private enforcement of competition law, especially Art. 5 of Directive 2014/104/EU |
| Directive 2004/48/EC Art. 6(1) | evidence disclosure in IP enforcement | Background | Art. 5(1) of Directive 2014/104/EU in addition has a wording similar to Article 6(1) of Directive 2004/48/EC. |
| C/2020/4829 | protection of confidential information in private competition enforcement | Background | see, by way of comparison, Communication on the protection of confidential information by national courts in proceedings for the private enforcement of EU competition law, C/2020/4829, para 12 |
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.
Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.