UPC CoA 636/2024

At the UPC: Meril Group (60 cases)

• 2025-05-05
  Decision By DefaultPublic

  Summary: Decision by the Court of Appeal (UPC_CoA_636/2024, 5 May 2025) setting aside a first-instance order that had granted a member of the public access to written pleadings under R. 262.1(b) RoP. The CoA held that public applicants for register access must be represented; an unrepresented person cannot validly lodge a statement of response; a reasoned decision under R. 235.3 RoP is effectively a default decision; and no costs should ordinarily be awarded in R. 262.1(b) proceedings.

  Show the legal issues (5)

  • Public access to register (R. 262.1(b) RoP)
  • Representation requirement
  • Reasoned decision (R. 235.3 RoP)
  • Decision by default (R. 357 RoP)
  • Costs in access-to-register proceedings
• 2025-02-12
  Public

  Summary: Court of Appeal order in Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. v. SWAT Medical AB / Respondent 1 concerning representation (R. 8.1 RoP). The appeal arose from a public access application (R. 262.1(b) RoP). The court held: (1) even lawyers and European Patent Attorneys who are themselves parties must be represented before the UPC; (2) representation is a public policy admissibility issue the court may raise at any time of its own motion; (3) Meril Life Sciences' late argument that the access request was inadmissible from the outset due to invalid representation was brought too late under R. 226 and R. 222.2 RoP.

  Show the legal issues (4)

  • Mandatory representation before UPC (R. 8.1 RoP)
  • Lawyers and EPAs as parties must still be represented
  • Admissibility of public access request under R. 262.1(b) RoP
  • Late submission rule (R. 222.2 RoP)