Overview · Filed: Sep 11, 2024
UPC_CoA_523/2024
HERBICIDE COMPOSITIONS
AppealsMain AppealCourt of AppealAppealCase Closed
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.
No citations extracted from this case's decisions.
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.
| Cited in | Date | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UPC_APP_21951/2025 Court of Appeal | May 21, 2025 | security for enforcement is discretionary; defendant must raise at first instance | Binding | see EPG CoA, Order of 3 March 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024, APL_51115/2024, Sumi/Syngenta, para. 112 and 114 |
| ACT_14764/2025 Hamburg LD | Jun 16, 2025 | security discretion in inter partes provisional measures | Binding | (CoA, Order of 3 March 2025, UPC-CoA_523/2024, para 110 – Sumi Agro v Syngenta) |
| UPC_APP_20809/2025 Court of Appeal | Dec 24, 2025 | procedural | Binding | Filip Alois J. De Corte and Dr. Christopher Andrews, European patent attorneys (Syngenta Crop Protection AG) PATENT AT ISSUE EP 2 152 073 Appeal n°: UPC_CoA_523/2024 2 PANEL AND DECIDING JUDGES Klaus Grabinski, Presiding judge and |
| UPC_APP_20809/2025 Court of Appeal | Dec 24, 2025 | FRAND | Binding | d request of both parties, the Judge-Rapporteur ordered on 29 July 2025 a stay of the proceedings in respect of the application for a rehearing App_20809/2025 UPC_CoA_523/2024 until 30 September 2025 and allowed both parties to ask for an extension |
| UPC_CoA_930/2025 Court of Appeal | Mar 18, 2026 | jurisdiction | Binding | see decision of 19 December 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024, Docket Navigator, paragraphs 18-19 with references |
| UPC_CFI_553/2025 Hamburg LD | Oct 21, 2025 | cost decision justified in inter partes provisional measures proceedings | Persuasive | According to the case law of the Court of Appeal (Order of 3 March 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024 – Sumi Agro/Syngenta; Order of 6 August 2024, UPC_CoA_335/2024, 10x Genomics/NanoString) |
| UPC_CFI_387/2025 Hamburg LD | Aug 14, 2025 | cost decision should be issued in inter partes PI proceedings | Binding | The Court is of the opinion, like the Court of Appeal (Order of 3 March 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024 – Sumi Agro v. Syngen-ta; Order of 6 August 2024, UPC_CoA_335/2024, 10x Genomics et al v. NanoString), that a cost decision should be issued in inter pa... |
| UPC_CFI_387/2025 Hamburg LD | Aug 14, 2025 | cost decision should be issued in inter partes PI proceedings | Binding | The Court is of the opinion, like the Court of Appeal (Order of 3 March 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024 – Sumi Agro v. Syngen-ta; Order of 6 August 2024, UPC_CoA_335/2024, 10x Genomics et al v. NanoString), that a cost decision should be issued in inter pa... |
| UPC_CFI_612/2024 Paris LD | Oct 24, 2025 | claim construction — patentee must show undisclosed function more probable than not to skilled person | Binding | le demandeur ne peut se contenter d'affirmer que l'interprétation de l'invention est évidente pour l'homme du métier qui aurait pu aboutir à une telle conclusion. [...] son allégation est plus vraisemblable, qu'invraisemblable (UPC_CoA_523/2024, décision du 3 mars 2025). |
| UPC_CoA_464/2024 Court of Appeal | Nov 25, 2025 | jurisdiction — territorial scope of injunction after Romania accession | Distinguished | Edwards' reference to the Court of Appeal's order in the case of Syngenta v Sumi Agro (UPC_CoA_523/2024, order of 3 March 2025) cannot alter that assessment. |