UPClytics
View all cases

UPC CoA 239/2025

·EP3821580: METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR EFFICIENT NETWORK PROTECTION

Case details
Status
Action
Appeal
Category
Main Appeal
Division
Court of Appeal
Judges
Technology
Telecommunications
Language
First decided
May 28, 2025
Decisions
  • 2025-05-28
    OtherAppeal decisionAppeal RoP220.1

    The Court of Appeal revoked the Munich Local Division's order refusing Centripetal's ex parte application to preserve evidence at Palo Alto's Munich branch office and referred the case back to the Local Division. The Court held that the standard of proof for preservation of evidence is lower than for a full infringement action; mere plausibility of infringement suffices. The Court found that Centripetal's digital evidence preservation request was plausible and that the risk of evidence destruction was established. The order was limited in scope to monitoring Palo Alto's Network Security Solution and digital documentation at the Munich premises.

    Legal issues:Standard of proof for preservation of evidence (Art. 60(1) UPCA)Plausibility of infringementRisk of evidence destructionEx parte evidence preservation orderReferral back to CFI
Documents
  • Final%20order%20Centripetal%20-%20Palo%20Alto%20signed.pdf2025-05-28ENGLISH
Centripetal Limited v Palo Alto Networks, Inc. — UPC CoA 239/2025 | UPClytics