Germany: LD The Hague, 15 February 2024, R.9 Order On The Application Of Art. 33(3) UPCA, UPC_CFI_239/2023

1. Key takeaways

No bifurcation of infringement action and counterclaim for revocation (as unanimously requested by the parties)

A joint hearing of the infringement action and the counterclaim seems to be appropriate in particular for reasons of procedural expediency and avoids the risk of delay that might be involved with bifurcating. It is also preferable because it allows both issues – validity and infringement – to be decided on the basis of a uniform interpretation of the patent by the samepanel composed of the same judges. This is also in conformity with the preference of both parties.

2. Division

Local Division the Hague

3. UPC number

UPC_CFI_239/2023

4. Type of proceedings

Infringement Action/Counterclaim for revocation

5. Parties

Applicant: Plant-e Knowledge B.V.; Plant-e B.V.

Respondent: Arkyne Technologies S.L.

6. Patent(s)

EP 2137782

7. Body of legislation / Rules

Rule 9 RoP; Art. 33 UPCA; Rule 37 RoP

To view the full article, click here.

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.