UPC CoA 393/2025

At the UPC: AorticLab srl (6 cases)·Emboline, Inc. (6 cases)

• 2025-06-20
  Appeal RoP220.2Public

  Summary: The Court of Appeal allowed AorticLab's appeal and set aside the Munich Local Division's order granting Emboline's application for security for costs. The CoA held that Art. 69(4) UPCA provides no legal basis for a security for costs at the request of the claimant in an infringement action in response to a defendant's counterclaim for revocation. Allowing such security would unreasonably restrict the defendant's right to raise an invalidity defence by means of a mandatory counterclaim.

  Show the legal issues (3)

  • Security for costs (R. 158 RoP / Art. 69(4) UPCA)
  • No security for costs against defendant's counterclaim for revocation
  • Defendant's right to raise invalidity defence