UPC CoA 54/2026
—·EP2867997: WIRELESS INDUCTIVE POWER TRANSFER
- Case details
- Status—ActionAppealCategoryMain Appeal
- Parties
- RespondentsRepresentatives
- Joschua Fiedler-DLA Piper
- Division
- Court of Appeal
- Judges
- Rian Kalden · presiding
- Patricia Rombach · rapporteur
- Ingeborg Simonsson · legally qualified
- Technology
- Power Generation
- Language
- —
- First decided
- Apr 16, 2026
- 2026-04-16Appeal RoP220.1Public
Summary: The Court of Appeal denied Belkin's requests to extend the deadline for lodging the Statement of appeal and to issue a formal notice to remedy deficiencies under R.229.2 RoP. The Court held that the two-month time period for lodging a Statement of appeal (R.224.1(a) RoP) had not yet begun to run because the Court of First Instance issued its decision without reasons on 11 February 2026, and the period only starts when a reasoned decision is served. As no deadline had yet started, there was nothing to extend and no deficiency notice was required.
Show the legal issues (4)
- Commencement of the time period for lodging a Statement of appeal under R.224.1(a) RoP
- Whether a decision without reasons triggers the appeal time period
- Extension of appeal deadlines under R.9.3(a) RoP
- Requirement for reasoned decisions under Art.77(1) UPCA
- order%2016-4-26%20extension%2054-2026.pdf2026-04-16EN
The two-month period for lodging a Statement of appeal (R.224.1(a) RoP) only begins to run when the CFI issues a decision including reasons, since the grounds are indispensable to formulate the order or remedy sought under R.225(e) RoP
RespondentLegal basis: R.224.1(a) RoP; Art.77(1) UPCA; UPC_CoA_328/2024 (Ballino v Kinexon)
Request to extend the deadline for the R.225(e) requirement until the deadline for lodging the Grounds of appeal
RespondentLegal basis: R.9.4 RoPIn the alternative, request for a formal notice to remedy deficiencies pursuant to R.229.2 RoP
RespondentLegal basis: R.229.2 RoP