UPClytics
View all cases

UPC CoA 119/2026

Jul 23, 2026·EP3079153 SEP · AUDIO DECODING WITH SELECTIVE POST FILTERING

Case details
Status
Oral Phase
Action
Appeal
Category
Main appeal
Parties
Claimants
Representatives
Respondents
Representatives
Division
Court of Appeal
Technology
  • Electrical engineering
    Computer technology
Language
English
First decided
Aug 5, 2026
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
Median days to first decision
All UPC124
Judge Rian KaldenLocked
Judge Patricia RombachLocked
Judge Ingeborg SimonssonLocked

At the UPC: Dolby Group (38 cases)·Acer Group (11 cases)

Decisions
  • 2026-08-05
    AppealPublic

    Summary: The Court of Appeal rejected Dolby's and Vectis' application for suspensive effect under R. 223 RoP and their requests to stay the first-instance proceedings, holding that the impugned order of the Local Division The Hague was not manifestly wrong. Dolby's appeal was held inadmissible because the impugned order did not adversely affect it, the operative part having ruled only on the admissibility of the counterclaim against Vectis.

    Show the legal issues (6)
    • suspensive effect (Art. 74(1) UPCA, R. 223 RoP)
    • stay of proceedings (R. 295 RoP)
    • admissibility of an appeal by a party not adversely affected (R. 220.1 RoP)
    • intervener treated as a party (R. 315.4 RoP)
    • addition of a party (R. 305 RoP)
    • time limit for a preliminary objection (R. 19.1 RoP)
Document titleDatePublic
Oral procedure opened2026-08-14Not public
Written procedure closed2026-08-14Not public
Summons to oral hearing2026-08-13Not public
Summons2026-08-13Public
Receipt2026-08-10Not public
Cover sheet2026-08-10Not public
Document2026-08-10Not public
Document2026-08-10Not public
Document2026-08-10Not public
Receipt2026-08-07Not public