UPC CoA 935/2025

The Court of Appeal ordered the Appellant (defendant in first-instance infringement proceedings) to provide security for legal costs and other expenses in the amount of EUR 28,000, pursuant to Art. 69(4) UPCA and Rule 158 RoP. The Respondent (AMYCEL, LLC) had applied for EUR 56,000; the Court set the amount at approximately 50% of the applicable ceiling, having regard to the predominantly legal and procedural nature of the appeal and the principle of proportionality. Security must be provided within three weeks by deposit into the Court's designated account or by an unconditional irrevocable bank guarantee from an EU-licensed bank.

Court of Appeal dismissed the application for suspensive effect of an appeal against a default judgment of The Hague Local Division. The Court held that an application for suspensive effect must set out all reasons, facts, evidence and arguments at once; a second application is inadmissible unless new submissions could not reasonably have been made earlier.

Court of Appeal dismissed the anonymised applicant's application for suspensive effect of its appeal against a default decision from The Hague Local Division (which had granted provisional measures and subsequently a default judgment in favour of Amycel). The CoA held that the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances, that the impugned decision was manifestly erroneous, or that the appeal would become devoid of purpose without suspensive effect.