UPC CoA 549/2024

Order of the Court of Appeal partially granting a stay of enforcement (suspensive effect) of a first-instance injunction against Belkin Limited and its managing directors in proceedings concerning Koninklijke Philips N.V.'s patent. The stay was granted specifically regarding the injunctive orders against the managing directors (defendants 2-4) and related cost/publication orders, on the basis of a manifest error of law in holding that a managing director of an infringing company is personally liable as a 'middle person' under Art. 63(1) UPCA solely by virtue of their role as managing director. The stay was denied as to the remaining defendants.

The Court of Appeal partially granted Belkin's application for suspensive effect concerning the Munich Local Division's infringement decision (UPC_CFI_390/2023) in respect of EP 2 867 997. The Court granted suspensive effect specifically in relation to the publication order (Philips was not permitted to publish the impugned decision pending the appeal). However, suspensive effect was denied in all other respects as Belkin failed to demonstrate manifest error or infringement of fundamental procedural rights. The Court also held that a director of a patent-infringing company is not a 'third party intermediary' under Art. 63 UPCA merely by reason of their directorship. Security for enforcement under R.352.1 RoP must be ordered at the time of the decision, not retrospectively.