UPC CoA 57/2026

A successful appeal would result in the exclusion of the produced documents from the evidentiary record, so the appeal retains its purpose even if suspensive effect is denied; the consequences of enforcement can be effectively reversed.

The impugned order's confidentiality club is limited to legal representatives under Article 48 UPCA and their teams, and prohibits sharing with the client, so the protective measures are sufficient.

UPC procedure requires all facts and evidence to be adduced as early as possible; early disclosure does not constitute an impermissible pre-judgment of infringement.

Disclosure of construction drawings and manuals would permanently expose core technical know-how and cause irreparable harm that a successful appeal could not remedy.

The confidentiality measures are insufficient because they allow patent attorneys involved in prosecution/opposition/nullity proceedings to access the files and 'optimize' patent claims.

The confidentiality club improperly includes decision-makers such as the CEO and administrative directors of the claimant.

Compelled disclosure would anticipate procedural stages reserved for remedies and accounting, undermining the defendant's right to have infringement determined before facing liability consequences.