Overview · Filed: —
UPC_APP_42138/2024
METHOD AND MEANS FOR BROWSING BY WALKING
Procedural & sub-applicationsCase Management OrdersParis CDApplication Rop 333—
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.
Court of Justice EU · 8
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| Article 19(5) CJEU Statute | independence of representatives before CJEU | Background | appears to be modelled on a similar one found in Article 19 (5) of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union |
| C-110/21 P | independence requirement — employed or financially dependent representative | Persuasive | CJEU 14 July 2022, case C-110/21 P, Universität Bremen/ REA; CJEU 24 March 2022, case C-529/18 P, PJ v EUIPO |
| C-529/18 P | independence requirement for representatives | Persuasive | CJEU 24 March 2022, case C-529/18 P, PJ v EUIPO; CJEU 6 April 2017, case C-464/16 P, PITEE v Commission |
| C-464/16 P | independence requirement for representatives | Persuasive | CJEU 6 April 2017, case C-464/16 P, PITEE v Commission; CJEU 4 December 2014, case C-259/14 P, ADR Center v Commission |
| C-259/14 P | independence requirement for representatives | Persuasive | CJEU 4 December 2014, case C-259/14 P, ADR Center v Commission; CJEU 5 September 2013, case C-573/11, ClientEarth v. Council of the EU |
| C-573/11 | independence requirement for representatives | Persuasive | CJEU 5 September 2013, case C-573/11, ClientEarth v. Council of the EU; CJEU 6 September 2012, cases C‑422/11 P and C‑423/11 P |
| C-422/11 P | independence requirement for representatives | Persuasive | CJEU 6 September 2012, cases C‑422/11 P and C‑423/11 P, Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej and Republic of Poland v Commission |
| C-74/10 P | independence requirement for representatives | Persuasive | CJEU 29 September 2010, cases C‑74/10 P and C‑75/10 P, EREF v Commission |
Rules of Procedure · 2
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 361 | manifest inadmissibility | Binding | For the purposes of applying Rule 361 'RoP', the condition of manifest inadmissibility implies that the inadmissibility must be clearly evident from the pleadings and its assessment does not require any particular in-depth analysis. |
| 262A | confidentiality application | Background | claimant's application pursuant to Rule 262A 'RoP' of 9 April 2024 |
EPC article · 1
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 48(5) | independence of representatives | Binding | the wording of Article 48 (5) of the Unified Patent Court Agreement ('UPCA'), according to which "Representatives of the parties shall enjoy the rights and immunities necessary for the independent exercise of their duties" |
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.
Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.