1. Key takeaways
Background
The plaintiff filed a claim for damages subsequent to a German patent infringement case in which the defendant had been found to infringe the German part of EP 1 740 740 B1.
The defendant objected to the jurisdiction of the court regarding the damages claim. This objection was allowed by the judge-rapporteur, as per Rule 19 of the Rules of Procedure (RoP).
In response to the judge rapporteur's decision, the plaintiff requested a review by the entire panel of judges, as per Rule 331.1 and Rule 333.4 of the RoP. This request aimed to challenge the judge-rapporteur's decision and continue the proceedings before the entire panel of judges.
Admissibility of a request for review of a decision of the judge-rapporteur pursuant to Rule 333 RoP
The decision found the plaintiff's application for review by the entire panel of judges against the judge rapporteur's decision to be inadmissible:
Rule 333.1 RoP was found to be not applicable because Rule 333.1 RoP deals with review requests for procedural decisions or orders. The decision made by the judge-rapporteur was however not considered procedural, but rather final, as it pertains to jurisdictional matters. Also, no legal basis was found for considering Rule 333.1 RoP analogously. Instead, the rules provide for a different remedy, namely an appeal against a decision to allow a preliminary objection under Rule 21.1. RoP and Rule 220.1(a).
The decision stated that its order to reject the application for review is considered an order pursuant to Rule 220.2 RoP which can be appealed with the leave of the Court.
The decision granted the leave. Since the plaintiff was unsuccessful with its motion, and the decision pertains to fundamental questions of the understanding of the RoP, granting leave for appeal was considered appropriate.
2. Division
Local Division Hamburg
3. UPC number
UPC_CFI_559935/2023
4. Type of proceedings
Admissibility of a request for review of a decision by the judge-rapporteur by the panel of judges pursuant to Rule 333 RoP
5. Parties
Fives ECL, SAS
REEL GmbH
6. Body of legislation / Rules
Rule 21.1 RoP, Rules 331 and 333 RoP, Rule 220.1(a), (b) RoP, Rule 220.2 RoP
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
