UPClytics
View all cases

APL 59329/2024

·EP2746957 +1 more: Intelligent interrupt distributor

Case details
Status
Action
Appeal
Category
Main Appeal
Parties
Claimants
Reps: Thomas Lynker (TALIENS); Evelyn Höfer (TALIENS)
Respondents
Reps: Klaus Haft (Hoyng Rokh Monegier)
Division
Court of Appeal
Judges
Technology
Computing & AI
Language
First decided
Nov 27, 2024
Last decision
Jan 14, 2025
Decisions
  • 2025-01-14
    Appeal decisionRequest for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3)

    The Court of Appeal revoked the Mannheim Local Division's order on security for costs issued solely by the judge-rapporteur, finding that the judge-rapporteur was not competent to grant leave to appeal against such an order; the matter was referred back to the Court of First Instance for panel review.

    Legal issues:Security for costs (R. 158 RoP, Art. 69(4) UPCA)Competence of judge-rapporteur vs. panel for leave to appealPanel review (R. 333 RoP)
  • 2024-11-27
    Appeal decisionRequest for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3)

    Court of Appeal order on a request for discretionary review (R. 220.3 RoP) of a first-instance order requiring TOTAL SEMICONDUCTOR to provide security for costs of EUR 600,000 (R. 158 RoP), in which leave to appeal had been refused. The Court of Appeal examined whether a judge-rapporteur acting alone has competence to issue a security-for-costs order under R. 158 RoP and to refuse leave to appeal, or whether the full panel is required. The order resulted in a further procedural step inviting party submissions on this competence question.

    Legal issues:Competence of judge-rapporteur to issue security-for-costs order (R. 158 RoP)Discretionary review (R. 220.3 RoP)Denial of leave to appeal by judge-rapporteur
Documents
  • 812E66100A99A1DD2C001A02B116B6A2_en.pdf2024-11-27EN
  • 03FDFDCE5E1D8F0EE6CA85D5D7809C1B_en.pdf2025-01-14EN