UPC CoA 317/2025

At the UPC: Barco N.V. (9 cases)·Yealink (Xiamen) Network Technology Co. Ltd. (9 cases)

• 2025-08-21
  Public

  Summary: Court of Appeal order denying Yealink's request for simultaneous interpretation at the oral hearing in provisional measures proceedings. The Court held that a party must justify the need for court-ordered simultaneous interpretation; the fact that the defendant is based in a non-English speaking country or that company officials will have difficulties following proceedings does not generally justify such an order. The same applies to interpretation at the parties' own cost. A party may instead engage a private interpreter at its own expense with two weeks' notice to the Registry (R. 109.4 RoP).

  Show the legal issues (3)

  • Simultaneous interpretation at oral hearing (R. 109 RoP)
  • Party representation requirements (Art. 48 UPCA)
  • Presence of company officials at hearing
• 2025-08-14
  Public

  Summary: The Court of Appeal issued an order in Barco v. Yealink proceedings concerning an application for leave to change the claim (R. 263 RoP) and a request for further written pleadings (R. 36 RoP). The court denied leave to introduce a subsidiary claim that broadened the previous claim scope without justification for the late filing. The court also addressed the boundaries of permissible references to first-instance oral hearing statements on appeal.

  Show the legal issues (4)

  • Leave to change claim on appeal (R. 263 RoP)
  • Broadening of claims on appeal
  • Exchange of further written pleadings on appeal (R. 36 RoP)
  • Reference to first-instance oral hearing statements (R. 284 RoP)