APL 596007/2023

—·EP3295663: DIGITALLY OVERLAYING AN IMAGE WITH ANOTHER IMAGE

Case details: Status
—
Action
Appeal
Category
Main Appeal
Parties: Claimants
AIM Sport Development AG
Reps: Johanna Flythström (Roschier); Mikael Segercrantz (Roschier); Ari Laakkonen (Powell Gilbert (Europe) LLP); Siddharth Kusumakar (Powell Gilbert (Europe) LLP); Ralph Nack (Noerr Partnerschaftsgesellschaft mbB); Niclas Gajeck (Noerr Partnerschaftsgesellschaft mbB); Maximilian von Rospatt (rospatt osten pross)
Respondents
Supponor Oy
Supponor Limited
Supponor SASU
Supponor Italia SRL
Supponor España SL
Reps: Henrik Lehment (Hogan Lovells International LLP); Matthias Sonntag (Gleiss Lutz); Panu Siitonen (Hannes Snellman)
Division: Court of Appeal
Judges: Rian Kalden · Presiding judge and judge-rapporteur
Ingeborg Simonsson · Legally qualified judge
Patricia Rombach · Legally qualified judge
Technology: Computing & AI
Language: —
First decided: Nov 12, 2024

Decisions

2024-11-12
Appeal decisionAppeal RoP220.1
The Court of Appeal ruled on the interpretation of the term 'action' in Article 83 UPCA regarding jurisdiction and withdrawal of opt-outs during the transitional period. The Court held that the sentence concerning national court actions in Art. 83(4) UPCA refers only to actions brought during the transitional regime.
Legal issues:Jurisdiction of the UPCWithdrawal of opt-outInterpretation of Art. 83 UPCATransitional regime

Documents