UPC Analytics
ENDE
Overview · Filed: Apr 3, 2024

UPC_CFI_159/2024

JUICE EXTRACTOR

InfringementMain Infringement ActionMannheim LDInfringementCase Closed
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.

EPC article · 4

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
Art. 69 UPCAcosts; unsuccessful party bears costsBindingThe decision on costs is based on Art. 69 (1) UPCA, R. 118.5 RoP.
Art. 67 EPCprovisional protection; compensation for acts prior to grantBindingpay compensation pursuant to Art. 67 EPC in Germany.
Art. 67 UPCAright to information on infringementBindingthe information provided by the UPCA as laid down in particular in Art. 67 UPCA and Art. 68 (3) (a) (b) UPCA in conjunction with R. 191 sentence 1 alternative 2 RoP
Art. 68 UPCAdamages; time periods before UPCA entry into forceBindingArt. 67 UPCA and Art. 68 (3) (a) (b) UPCA in conjunction with R. 191 sentence 1 alternative 2 RoP are to interpreted to encompass time periods which resided before the entry into force of the UPCA.

Rules of Procedure · 1

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
RoP_rule 118costs allocationBindingThe decision on costs is based on Art. 69 (1) UPCA, R. 118.5 RoP.
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.
Cited inDateLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
ACT_17434/2024

Paris LD

May 23, 2025jurisdictionBindingdefined in Article 34 UPCA related to "Territorial scope of decisions". In other words, Article 34 UPCA “relates to the scope of the effect of the decisions” (UPC_CFI_159/2024, LD Mannheim, Decision 11 March 2025, §107). The territorial scope of a UP
UPC_CFI_471/2023

Mannheim LD

Apr 23, 2025infringement by equivalentsBindingLokalkammer Mannheim hat bereits entschieden, auf welche Verletzungshandlungen nationales materielles Recht bzw. materielles Recht des EPGU anwendbar ist (vgl. Entscheidungen vom 11. Marz 2025, UPC_CFI_159/2024