APL_40470/2024

TREATMENT OF PAROXYSMAL NOCTURNAL HEMOGLOBINURIA PATIENTS BY AN INHIBITOR OF COMPLEMENT

AppealsMain AppealCourt of AppealAppeal RoP220.1—

This case cites

Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
295	stay of proceedings	Binding	This provision has been implemented in both R. 295(g) RoP, which refers to R. 118 RoP, and R. 295(a) RoP.
295	stay of proceedings	Binding	Pursuant to Art. 33(10) UPCA and R. 295(a) RoP, the Court may stay proceedings relating to a patent which is also the subject of opposition proceedings before the EPO when a rapid decision may be expected from the EPO.
118	stay of proceedings	Binding	R. 118 RoP contains provisions regarding decisions on the merits.
118.2	stay of proceedings	Binding	R. 118.2(b) RoP and R. 295(g) RoP are therefore applicable when the case is ready for a decision.
222.2	new submissions on appeal	Binding	Pursuant to R. 222.2 RoP, the Court of Appeal may disregard "requests, facts and evidence" which were not submitted by a party during the proceedings before the Court of First Instance.
295	stay of proceedings	Distinguished	Under R. 295(m) RoP, the Court may stay proceedings "in any other case where the proper administration of justice so requires". However, this general ground for a stay is not applicable in the present case

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
UPC_CoA_22/2024	stay of proceedings	Distinguished	Unlike decisions in parallel revocation proceedings and opposition proceedings, which are not irreconcilable (Court of Appeal 28 May 20204, APL_3507/2024, UPC_CoA_22/2024, Carrier/BITZER, paragraph 25)

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
33	stay of proceedings	Binding	Art. 33(10) UPCA provides that the Court may stay its proceedings if a rapid decision may be expected from the EPO.

Cited by

Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.

Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.