ARTICLE
16 July 2025

CoA, July 9, 2025, Order, UPC_CoA_430/2025

BP
Bardehle Pagenberg

Contributor

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG combines the expertise of attorneys-at-law and patent attorneys. As one of the largest IP firms in Europe, BARDEHLE PAGENBERG advises in all fields of Intellectual Property, including all procedures before the patent and trademark offices as well as litigation before the courts through all instances.
Case management orders, such as orders concerning security for costs, require panel review before appeal
Luxembourg Intellectual Property

1. Key takeaways

Case management orders, such as orders concerning security for costs, require panel review before appeal

R. 333.1 RoP mandates that case maagement orders issued by the judge-rapporteur (e.g. security for costs orders) must be reviewed by the panel of the CFI before an appeal to the CoA is admissible:

  • Judge-rapporteur's decision to grant leave to appeal does not override this requirement or create a legitimate expectation of admissibility.
  • CoA has a duty to examine the admissibility of appeals on its own motion.

Referral to the full Court of Appeal is reserved for cases of exceptional importance with potential impact on case law consistency, R. 238A RoP.

2. Division

Court of Appeal

3. UPC number

UPC_CoA_430/2025, APL_23093/2025, ORD_31690/2025

4. Type of proceedings

Appeal RoP 220.2

5. Parties

Appellant (Defendant in the main proceedings before CFI): CHINT NEW ENERGY TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.

Respondent (Claimant in the main proceedings before CFI): JINGAO SOLAR CO., LTD.

6. Patent(s)

EP 2 787 541

7. Body of legislation / Rules

R. 158 RoP, R. 333.1 RoP, R. 238A RoP

CoA, July 9, 2025, order, UPC_CoA_430_2025

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.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More