UPC Analytics
ENDE
Overview · Filed:

APL_50205/2024

AppealsMain AppealCourt of AppealAppeal RoP220.2
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.

Rules of Procedure · 6

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
222.2new submissions on appealBindingPursuant 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. This wording makes it clear that the rule does not apply to legal arguments.
295stay of proceedingsBindingThis provision has been implemented in both R. 295(g) RoP, which refers to R. 118 RoP, and R. 295(a) RoP.
295stay of proceedingsBindingPursuant 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.
118.2stay of proceedingsBindingR. 118.2(b) RoP and R. 295(g) RoP are therefore applicable when the case is ready for a decision.
118stay of proceedingsBindingR. 118 RoP contains provisions regarding decisions on the merits.
295stay of proceedingsDistinguishedUnder 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

EPC article · 1

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
33stay of proceedingsBindingArt. 33(10) UPCA provides that the Court may stay its proceedings if a rapid decision may be expected from the EPO.

UPC Court of Appeal · 1

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
UPC_CoA_22/2024stay of proceedingsDistinguishedUnlike 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)
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.

Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.