UPC CoA 905/2025

At the UPC: vivo Group (18 cases)·Sun Patent Trust (31 cases)

• 2026-03-16
  Appeal RoP220.2Public

  Summary: The Court of Appeal (Panel 1a) dismissed VIVO's appeal against the Paris Local Division's order deferring the decision on the admissibility of claim A.II of the Statement of Claim to the main proceedings. The CoA confirmed that the panel (not only the judge-rapporteur) was competent to make the deferral decision, and that the Paris LD did not exceed its margin of discretion. The appeal also concerned UPC_CoA_905/2025 (EP 3 852 468).

  Show the legal issues (4)

  • Competence of panel vs. judge-rapporteur to decide on preliminary objection (R. 19/20 RoP)
  • Deferral of preliminary objection on admissibility to main proceedings
  • FRAND defence and UPC jurisdiction (Art. 32 UPCA)
  • Case management responsibility under R. 331 and R. 102 RoP
• 2025-11-27
  Public

  Summary: The Court of Appeal (Panel 1a: Grabinski, Gougé, Blok) rejected VIVO's request for stay of the first-instance proceedings (UPC_CFI_362/2025 and UPC_CFI_361/2025) pending the appeal on the preliminary objection (R. 21.2 RoP) concerning EP 3 407 524 and EP 3 852 468. The court found no exceptional circumstances justifying a stay: the unresolved jurisdictional question did not constitute exceptional circumstances, and the costs of preparing VIVO's defence were insufficient. Sun Patent's interest in obtaining a timely decision outweighed VIVO's interest in avoiding preparation costs.

  Show the legal issues (4)

  • Stay of first-instance proceedings pending appeal on preliminary objection (R. 21.2 RoP)
  • Exceptional circumstances threshold for stay
  • FRAND and UPC jurisdiction (Art. 32 UPCA)
  • Balance of interests between parties