UPClytics
View all cases

UPC CoA 424/2025

May 12, 2025·EP3296274: FINING OF BOROALUMINO SILICATE GLASSES

Case details
Status
Case Closed
Action
Appeal
Category
Main Appeal
Division
Court of Appeal
Language
English
First decided
May 14, 2025
Decisions
  • 2025-05-14
    DismissedAppeal decisionRequest for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3)

    The Court of Appeal (Standing Judge Patricia Rombach) dismissed Hisense, TCL, and LG's request for discretionary review (R. 220.3 RoP) and application for suspensive effect in the Corning v. Hisense/TCL/LG infringement proceedings (EP 3 296 274) before the Mannheim Local Division. The Court upheld the judge-rapporteur's refusal to separate proceedings for the competing defendant groups. Separation of proceedings is not required to protect confidential supply chain information; R. 262A RoP confidentiality orders offer an adequate alternative. The applications for suspensive effect were dismissed.

    Legal issues:Separation of proceedings (R. 303.2 RoP)Protection of confidential supply chain informationDiscretionary review (R. 220.3 RoP)Confidentiality club as alternative to separation (R. 262A RoP)EU competition law and information exchange
Documents
Document titleDatePublic
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-05-14Not public
Outcome of the Order2025-05-14Not public
Final order2025-05-14Public
Panel-Appointment2025-05-12Not public
250512_Corning_v_TCL_LG_Hisense_Request_Discretionary_Review_signed2025-05-12Not public
Exhibit_BB10_250508 Decision separation 333_signed2025-05-12Not public
Exhibit_BB09_250428-EP-274-Comment-Corning-v-Hisense-LD-MA-66848-2024_CMS2025-05-12Not public
Exhibit_BB07_250409 Separation rejected2025-05-12Not public
Exhibit_BB11_Proof_Payment_fixed_fee2025-05-12Not public
Exhibit_BB06_250408_Separation_Request_Corning_v._TCL_LG_Hisense_signed2025-05-12Not public
Exhibit_BB08_250424_Corning_v_TCL_LG_Hisense_Application_Review_CM_Order_signed2025-05-12Not public