1. Key takeaways
The cost decision after the withdrawal of an action (or a request for provisional measures) is made in accordance with the general regulations in Rules 150 et seqq. RoP.
According to Rule 265.2(c) RoP, the Court shall "issue a cost decision in accordance with Part 1, Chapter 5" in case a withdrawal is permitted. This means that the general regulations in this Chapter apply and separate cost reimbursement proceedings may be initiated (and not that the decision permitting the withdrawal already has to include a final cost decision).
In case of an appeal against a cost decision, legal review is limited to a marginal review.
Legal review is limited to the questions, whether the cost decision gives the successful party more than would be acceptable and appropriate, or whether it deviates in other ways from the principles of Art. 69(1) UPCA, as stipulated in Rules 150 et seqq. RoP.
2. Division
Court of Appeal
3. UPC number
UPC_CoA_153/2025
APL_8639/2025
4. Type of proceedings
Appeal against a cost decision after the withdrawal of a request for provisional measures
5. Parties
APPELLANT:
Tiroler Rohre GmbH (Hall, Austria)
DEFENDANTS:
- SSAB Swedish Steel GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany)
- SSAB Europe Oy (Hämeenlinna, Finland)
6. Patent(s)
EP 2 839 083
7. Body of legislation / Rules
Rules 150 et seqq. RoP, Rule 265.2(c) RoP, Art. 69(1) (c) UPCA
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.
