Overview · Filed: —
APL_8790/2025
AppealsMain AppealCourt of AppealAppeal RoP220.2—
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.
courtName.other · 16
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 32(1) | procedural | Binding | issued on 02 June 2025 Appeal of a Preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP) HEADNOTES: - As a provision of an international treaty concluded between States, Art. 32(1) UPCA shall be interpretated in accordance with the principles of customary int |
| 32(1) | jurisdiction | Binding | he principles of customary international law, which are part of the EU legal order. - The absence of any temporal limitation of the rules on competence under Art. 32(1) UPCA reflects the object and purpose of the Agreement which is to create a cou |
| 32 (1) | jurisdiction | Binding | ing Member States integrated into their judicial system and to transfer (exclusive) competence to said court for those actions and counterclaims listed under Art. 32 (1) UPCA, in order to prevent the difficulties caused by a fragmented market for |
| 3 | procedural | Binding | In the absence of any provision contrary thereto, these object and purpose of the UPCA do neither suggest nor imply any temporal limitation of the Court. - Art. 3 UPCA does not address the temporal scope of application of the Agreement in relation |
| 83 | jurisdiction | Binding | hether acts having occurred before the entry into force are within the scope of application of the Agreement. - During the transitional period set out under Art. 83 UPCA, and unless the patent has been opted out from the exclusive competence of t |
| 83(3) | jurisdiction | Binding | - During the transitional period set out under Art. 83 UPCA, and unless the patent has been opted out from the exclusive competence of the Court pursuant to Art. 83(3) UPCA, the (exclusive) competence of the UPC coexists with a parallel competence |
| 3 | jurisdiction | Binding | S: Competence of the Court, Scope of application of the UPC Agreement, transitional [LAST PAGES] 8 after that date, without prejudice to Art. 83 UPCA. Art. 3 UPCA does not address the temporal scope of application of the Agreement in relati |
| 83(1) | jurisdiction | Binding | th under Art. 83 UPCA, the exclusive competence of the UPC is however limited by the parallel competence of national courts of the Contracting Members States (Art. 83(1) UPCA) as well as by the possibility for patent holders, subject to certain con |
| 83(4) | jurisdiction | Binding | ct to certain conditions, to opt-out their patent(s) from the exclusive competence of the Court (Art. 83(3) UPCA) and to withdraw said opt-out at any moment (Art. 83(4) UPCA). 29. According to Art. 83(1) UPCA, during a transitional period of sev |
| 83(3) | procedural | Binding | fringement or for revocation of a European patent […] may still be brought before national courts or other competent national authorities. 30. According to Art. 83(3) UPCA, unless an action has already been brought before the Court, a proprietor |
| Brussels I Recast Regulation | jurisdiction | Binding | ngement) of the action or as to the time period for which the chosen court is competent. 32. That understanding is further in line with Art. 71c (2) of EU Regulation 1215/2012 (hereafter “Brussels Ia Regulation”) which explicitly refers to its |
| Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties | jurisdiction | Background | e of the Agreement, does not contradict the principle of non-retroactivity of treaties under the principles of customary international law and Art. 28 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties done at Vienna on 23 May 1969 (“VCLT”). - In c |
| 3 | procedural | Binding | n Ermangelung einer gegenteiligen Bestimmung legen dieses Ziel und dieser Zweck eine zeitliche Begrenzung des Gerichts weder nahe noch deuten sie diese an. - Art. 3 EPGÜ befasst sich nicht mit dem zeitlichen Geltungsbereich des Übereinkommens in Be |
| 83 | jurisdiction | Binding | eführten Rechte verletzen. Er lässt daher offen, ob Handlungen vor Inkrafttreten des Übereinkommens, in den Geltungsbereich des EPGÜ fallen. - Während der in Art. 83 EPGÜ festgelegten Übergangszeit und sofern für das Patent die ausschließliche Zus |
| 56 | procedural | Binding | trennt voneinander beurteilt werden müssen. Die Frage, ob das materielle Recht der Art. 25 et seq. EPGÜ und die Maßnahmen, Verfahren und Abhilfemaßnahmen nach Art. 56 EPGÜ auf Handlungen anwendbar sind, die sich vor dem Inkrafttreten des EPGÜ ereig |
| 32 | jurisdiction | Binding | dung über die Zuständigkeit des Gerichts hat das Gericht die zu diesem Zeitpunkt geltenden Bestimmungen über die Zuständigkeit des Gerichts angewandt, nämlich Art. 32 EPGÜ, der zu diesem Zeitpunkt galt, was keine Frage der Rückwirkung aufwirft. |
UPC Court of Appeal · 4
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| UPC_CoA_156/2025 | jurisdiction | Binding | decide on alleged acts of infringement which have occurred during the time period between the date of the opt-out and that of the withdrawal. Appeal n°: UPC_CoA_156/2025 APL_8790/2025 2 KEYWORDS: Competence of the Court, Scope of ap |
| UPC_CoA_8790/2025 | jurisdiction | Background | acts of infringement which have occurred during the time period between the date of the opt-out and that of the withdrawal. Appeal n°: UPC_CoA_156/2025 APL_8790/2025 2 KEYWORDS: Competence of the Court, Scope of application of the UP |
| UPC_CoA_156/2025 | jurisdiction | Binding | lich anerkannten Völkerecht und Art. 28 des Wiener Übereinkommens über das Recht der Verträge, abgeschlossen in Wien am 23. Mai 1969 („WÜRV“). Berufung n°: UPC_CoA_156/2025 APL_8790/2025 2 - Im Falle eines wirksamen Rücktritts vom Ausschluss |
| UPC_CoA_8790/2025 | jurisdiction | Background | Völkerecht und Art. 28 des Wiener Übereinkommens über das Recht der Verträge, abgeschlossen in Wien am 23. Mai 1969 („WÜRV“). Berufung n°: UPC_CoA_156/2025 APL_8790/2025 2 - Im Falle eines wirksamen Rücktritts vom Ausschluss der ausschließlic |
Rules of Procedure · 2
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19 | procedural | Binding | [FIRST PAGES] 1 ORDER of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court issued on 02 June 2025 Appeal of a Preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP) HEADNOTES: - As a provision of an international treaty concluded between States, Art. |
| 19 | procedural | Binding | [FIRST PAGES] 1 ANORDNUNG des Berufungsgerichts des Einheitlichen Patentgerichts erlassen am 2. Juni 2025 Berufung gegen einen unter R. 19 VerfO erlassenen Einspruch LEITSATZ: - Als Bestimmung eines zwischen Staaten geschlossenen |
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.
Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.