Overview · Filed: Jan 5, 2026
UPC_CoA_3/2026
ROBOT LOCALIZING METHOD, ROBOT, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
AppealsMain AppealCourt of AppealAppealCase Closed
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.
Rules of Procedure · 3
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 197 | jurisdiction | Binding | concerning review of an ex parte order for inspection (R. 197 RoP) |
| 284 | jurisdiction | Binding | Representatives are generally obliged not to misrepresent facts (R. 284 RoP). |
| 192.3 | jurisdiction | Binding | R. 192.3 RoP imposes a heightened requirement where the applicant must disclose, and not leave out, any material facts that might be relevant for an ex parte order. |
UPC Court of Appeal · 1
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| UPC_CoA_182/2024 | jurisdiction | Binding | the Court is under no obligation to consult other casefiles (UPC_CoA_182/2024, order of 25 September 2024, Mammut vs Ortovox, para 72) |
UPC (CFI) · 1
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| UPC_CFI_834/2025 | jurisdiction | Background | Order of 19 December 2025, Local Division Düsseldorf, UPC_CFI_834/2025 |
courtName.other · 1
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 7 Directive 2004/48 | jurisdiction | Background | Ecovacs unsuccessfully suggests a referral to the CJEU to clarify the scope of "relevant evidence" that can be obtained pursuant to Article 7 of Directive 2004/48. |
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.
Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.