UPC CoA 52/2026

At the UPC: Huawei Group (62 cases)·Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP (0 cases)

• 2026-06-29
  Application RoP262.1 (b)Public

  Summary: The Court of Appeal dismissed Huawei's appeal against the first instance decision granting Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan access to pleadings filed in concluded infringement proceedings (UPC_CFI_254/2025) under R. 262.1(b) RoP. The court confirmed that Quinn Emanuel had a legitimate interest in accessing the documents for professional education and advisory purposes, and rejected Huawei's objections based on alleged misuse and confidentiality, as adequate redactions had already been applied.

  Show the legal issues (5)

  • Public access to court documents under R. 262.1(b) RoP
  • Reviewability of rapporteur decisions by the panel under R. 333 RoP
  • Admissibility of appeal against panel review decision under R. 220.2 and 220.3 RoP
  • Legitimate interest of a law firm in accessing pleadings for professional education
  • Confidentiality and redaction of documents in concluded proceedings
• 2026-05-13
  Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3)Public

  Summary: The Court of Appeal granted Huawei's request for a discretionary review under R. 220.3 RoP, finding that the case raises fundamental legal questions regarding whether a rapporteur's decision under R. 262.1(b) RoP is reviewable by the panel under R. 333 RoP and how an appeal may be brought against such a decision. The appeal was admitted and referred to a panel of the Court of Appeal, with Huawei ordered to pay additional court fees of €2,700 to top up to the full appeal fee of €4,000.

  Show the legal issues (5)

  • Admissibility of discretionary review under R. 220.3 RoP
  • Whether a rapporteur's R. 262.1(b) decision on access to court file is reviewable by the panel under R. 333 RoP
  • Applicable appeal route under R. 220 RoP against a R. 262.1(b) decision
  • Criteria for a legitimate training/professional development interest versus fishing expedition under R. 262.1(b) RoP
  • Burden of proof for access to court documents by third-party law firm