LD Mannheim, April 2, 2025, Order On Preliminary Objection, UPC_CFI_819/2024

1. Key takeaways

Multiple Defendants may be sued in one action provided that the infringement has occured in the CMS hosting the Local Division, irrespective of a “commercial relationship”

1. Claimant submitted in its Statement of claim sufficient facts, which establish competence of the Local Division Mannheim for each and every defendant under Art. 33(1)(a)UPCA, which is reinforced by R. 303.1 RoP. Whether or not those allegations are true or not and if in fact all glass sheets stem from the same process and are identical or not is subject to the main proceedings (cf. UPC_CoA_188/2024 Order of 3 September 2024 para.18). Claimant was not obliged to sue the defendants to these proceedings jointly together with the defendants of ACT_66849/2024; UPC_CFI_820/2024. There is no such obligation always to sue OEMs and suppliers in one proceeding.
2. Therefore, it is not necessary to establish competence also under Art.33(1)(b)UPCA so that the arguments put forward by defendants do not have to be addressed.
3. Also, defendants general reference to fair trial principles is not persuasive and does not change the situation: First, in the end defendants do not contest that claimant could – and in their eyes even should – bring separate actions against all members of each group of defendants jointly. Therefore, in principle defendants themselves correctly see that multiple allegedly infringing defendants can be sued jointly. Second, their argument, that suing the three groups of companies being competitors were counter to their fundamental procedural rights, is misplaced, as the groups can even join forces in order to defend themselves against Claimant's allegations. Obviously, they even did so by mandating identical representatives in order to save costs of litigation, which apparently had no reason to believe that they engaged in representing clients with conflicting interests in breach of professional laws applicable to German lawyers (§ 3 Abs. 1 German Berufsordnung für Rechtsanwälte as of 1 June 2023).

2. Division

LD Mannheim

3. UPC number

UPC_CFI_819/2024

ORD_10672/2025

4. Type of proceedings

Preliminary Objection

5. Parties

CLAIMANT and respondent:

Corning Incorporated (United States)

DEFENDANTS and (partially) applicants:

1. Hisense Gorenje Germany GmbH
2. Hisense Europe Holding GmbH
3. TCL Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG
4. TCL Deutschland Verwaltungs GmbH
5. TCL Operations Polska, Sp. z o.o.
6. TCL Belgium
7. LG Electronics Deutschland GmbH
8. LG Electronics European Shared Service Center B.V.
9. LG Electronics European Holding B.V.

6. Patent(s)

EP 3 296 274

7. Body of legislation / Rules

Rules 19, 303 RoP, Art. 33(1) (a), (b) UPCA

2025-4-3 UPC_CFI_819_2024 ORD_10672_2025_en

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.