UPClytics
View all cases

UPC APP 27069/2025

·EP3356109: FOAM RESIN STRUCTURAL PART FOR A FRAME OF A VEHICLE AND PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR

Case details
Status
Action
Procedural application
Category
Other Procedural
Parties
Claimants
Reps: Dirk Jestaed (Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben Partnerschaft mbB)
Respondents
Reps: Rüdiger Pansch (rospatt Rechtsanwälte PartGmbB)
Division
Court of Appeal
Judges
Language
First decided
Jun 17, 2025
Decisions
  • 2025-06-17
    Generic application

    The Court of Appeal declared inadmissible Knaus Tabbert AG's 'Gegenvorstellung' (objection to the rejection of its stay application under R. 223 RoP), holding that a mere challenge to the reasoning of the appellate order denying a suspensive effect does not constitute an admissible procedural remedy, and that new facts about third parties' financial situation that could have been raised at first instance are not admissible.

    Legal issues:Admissibility of 'Gegenvorstellung' against refusal of suspensive effect under R. 223 RoPAdmissibility of new facts in appellate proceedingsSuspensive effect of appeal
  • 2025-06-17
    DismissedGeneric application

    The Court of Appeal (Panel 2) declared inadmissible Knaus Tabbert AG's 'Gegenvorstellung' (objection) filed against the Court of Appeal's earlier rejection of Knaus Tabbert's application for suspensive effect (R.223 RoP). The Court held that an objection which merely challenges the Court of Appeal's legal opinion expressed in the order rejecting a suspensive effect application is inadmissible. The infringement action by Yellow Sphere Innovations GmbH and Erwin Härtwich regarding EP 3 356 109 (vehicle frame with foam resin structural part) continues.

    Legal issues:Admissibility of objection ('Gegenvorstellung') against Court of Appeal orderApplication for suspensive effect under R.223 RoPRight to effective remedy under Art.47 EU Charter
Documents
  • 0F4E4483168404E4665991BC92C18D37_de.pdf2025-06-17DE
  • orderobjectionEN.17.06pdf.pdf2025-06-17GERMAN