UPC_APP_30685/2025

ELECTROLYTIC MEDIUM, ELECTROPOLISHING PROCESS USING SUCH ELECTROLYTIC MEDIUM AND DEVICE TO CARRY IT OUT

Procedural & sub-applicationsCase Management OrdersCourt of AppealApplication Rop 223—

This case cites

Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
74	suspensive effect of appeal	Binding	An appeal shall not have suspensive effect unless the Court of Appeal decides otherwise at the motivated request of one of the parties (Art.74.1 UPCA).
62	provisional measures — infringement	Background	the Hamburg LD held that it is more likely than not that the patent at issue has been infringed by OTEC and, while considering the grant of a preliminary injunction to be appropriate and justified (Art. 62(1), 25(a) UPCA)

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
223	suspensive effect — application	Binding	OTEC filed an application for suspensive effect of the appeal against the impugned order under R. 223 RoP
223.2	suspensive effect — content of application	Binding	According to R. 223.2 RoP, the application for suspensive effect shall set out (a) the reasons why the lodging of the appeal shall have suspensive effect and (b) the facts, evidence and arguments relied on.

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
UPC_CoA_388/2024	suspensive effect — exceptional circumstances required	Binding	The Court of Appeal can grant the application only if the circumstances of the case justify an exception to the principle that the appeal has no suspensive effect (UPC_CoA_388/2024, APL_39884/2024, 19 August 2024, Sibio v Abbott

Cited by

Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.

Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.