UPC CoA 57/2026
Apr 20, 2026·EP2334762 +1 more: METHOD FOR PRODUCTION OF A CLEAN HOT GAS BASED ON SOLID FUELS
- Case details
- StatusCase ClosedActionAppealCategoryMain Appeal
- Parties
- ClaimantsReps: Rainer Schultes (GEISTWERT Kletzer Messner Mosing Schnider Schultes Rechtsanwälte OG)
- Division
- Court of Appeal
- Language
- English
- First decided
- Apr 24, 2026
- Last decision
- Jun 29, 2026
- 2026-06-29Appeal decisionAppeal RoP220.1
The Court of Appeal partially allowed Polytechnik's appeal against the production of evidence order issued by the Copenhagen Local Division on 10 April 2026. The appellate court set aside the first operative paragraph and replaced it with a narrower order limited to construction drawings of the furnace at the Oberpullendorf site and relevant operation and maintenance manuals, finding that the original order exceeded the limits of proportionality under Art. 59 UPCA and R. 190 RoP; the remainder of the impugned order was upheld.
Legal issues:Production of evidence order under Art. 59 UPCA and R. 190 RoPProportionality and necessity of evidence production scopeProtection of confidential technical and commercial informationBalance between right of access to evidence and effective judicial protection under CJEU case law - 2026-04-24Application Rop 223
The Court of Appeal rejected Polytechnik's application for suspensive effect of the Copenhagen Local Division's order dated 10 April 2026, which required Polytechnik to produce construction drawings and operation/maintenance manuals. The Court found that the appeal would not be rendered moot by enforcement, that the confidentiality measures in the impugned order were sufficient and correctly interpreted, and that no exceptional circumstances justifying suspensive effect were established.
Legal issues:Application for suspensive effect under R. 223 RoPOrder to produce evidence under Rule 190 RoP and Article 59 UPCAProtection of confidential information and scope of confidentiality club under Rule 262A RoPConditions for granting suspensive effect — irreparable harm and manifest errorInterpretation of 'legal representatives' under Article 48 UPCA for confidentiality club membershipRisk of factual pre-judgment of infringement proceedings through early evidence disclosure
| Document title | Date | Public |
|---|---|---|
| action.phaseChange.caseClose | 2026-06-29 | Not public |
| action.publishOrderDecision.order | 2026-06-29 | Not public |
| action.issueDecision.decision | 2026-06-29 | Not public |
| Final Order | 2026-06-29 | Public |
| action.phaseChange.deliberationPhaseOpen | 2026-06-19 | Not public |
| action.phaseChange.oralPhaseClose | 2026-06-19 | Not public |
| Hearing recording reference document | 2026-06-19 | Not public |
| action.phaseChange.oralPhaseOpen | 2026-05-26 | Not public |
| action.phaseChange.interimPhaseClose | 2026-05-26 | Not public |
| action.summons.oralHearing | 2026-05-25 | Not public |
| Summons | 2026-05-25 | Public |
| Receipt | 2026-05-18 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-05-18 | Not public |
| Submission Appellant | 2026-05-18 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-05-15 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-05-15 | Not public |
| Document Respondent | 2026-05-15 | Not public |
| action.phaseChange.interimPhaseOpen | 2026-05-13 | Not public |
| action.phaseChange.writtenPhaseClose | 2026-05-13 | Not public |
| action.issueOrder.order | 2026-05-13 | Not public |
| Order | 2026-05-13 | Public |
| Receipt | 2026-05-11 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-05-11 | Not public |
| Statement of Response | 2026-05-11 | Not public |
| action.publishOrderDecision.order | 2026-04-24 | Not public |
| action.issueOrder.order | 2026-04-24 | Not public |
| Order | 2026-04-24 | Public |
| Receipt | 2026-04-23 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-04-23 | Not public |
| Statement of the Grounds of Appeal | 2026-04-23 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-04-21 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-04-21 | Not public |
| Document Respondent | 2026-04-21 | Not public |
| action.publishOrderDecision.case | 2026-04-21 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-04-21 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-04-21 | Not public |
| Other document Appellant | 2026-04-21 | Not public |
| Formal Deficiency found | 2026-04-21 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-04-20 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-04-20 | Not public |
| Fee | 2026-04-20 | Not public |
| Proof of payment | 2026-04-20 | Not public |
| Proof of payment | 2026-04-20 | Not public |
| Proof of payment | 2026-04-20 | Not public |
| Proof of payment | 2026-04-20 | Not public |
| Statement of Appeal | 2026-04-20 | Not public |
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.
RespondentLegal basis: Article 74(1) UPCA; UPC_CoA_407/2023; UPC_CoA_177/2024; UPC_CoA_301/2024The 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.
RespondentLegal basis: Article 48 UPCA; Rule 262A.6 RoPUPC procedure requires all facts and evidence to be adduced as early as possible; early disclosure does not constitute an impermissible pre-judgment of infringement.
RespondentLegal basis: Rule 171 RoP; Rule 222 RoP
Disclosure of construction drawings and manuals would permanently expose core technical know-how and cause irreparable harm that a successful appeal could not remedy.
ClaimantLegal basis: R. 223 RoP; Article 74(1) UPCAThe confidentiality measures are insufficient because they allow patent attorneys involved in prosecution/opposition/nullity proceedings to access the files and 'optimize' patent claims.
ClaimantLegal basis: Rule 262A RoPThe confidentiality club improperly includes decision-makers such as the CEO and administrative directors of the claimant.
ClaimantLegal basis: Rule 262A RoP; Article 48 UPCACompelled disclosure would anticipate procedural stages reserved for remedies and accounting, undermining the defendant's right to have infringement determined before facing liability consequences.
ClaimantLegal basis: R. 223 RoP