rapporteur Ingeborg Simonsson
2 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
2 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1
Innovative Sonic Corporation v.Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd., OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd., Realme Chongqing Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd., OROPE Germany GmbH, OTECH Germany GmbH, Realme Germany GmbH, Oleading B.V., Reflection Investment B.V., OTECH Italia S.r.l.
This UPC Court of Appeal decision addressed a procedural challenge regarding the language of proceedings in an infringement case involving Innovative Sonic Corporation and OPPO et al. The appeal sought to overturn the initial decision to switch from German to English, arguing that this change created undue costs for the claimant. However, the Court upheld the original order, finding that English was the common working language across the parties' global operations and technology field. This ruling reinforces the court's discretion in prioritizing fairness based on practical factors like industry language and party domicile.
AIM Sport Development AG v.Supponor Italia SRL, Supponor SASU, Supponor España SL, Supponor Oy, Supponor Limited
This UPC Court of Appeal decision addresses a critical procedural issue regarding the time limit for lodging an appeal against an order from the Court of First Instance (CFI). The appellant, AIM Sport Development AG, argued that the CFI's own 'Information about appeal' stated a two-month deadline, even though the strict rule (R.224.1(b) RoP) mandated only 15 days for certain orders. Applying the principle of legitimate expectations, the Court of Appeal sided with AIM, finding the appeal admissible. This ruling highlights the importance of procedural fairness and how courts must interpret rules when CFI guidance creates a reasonable expectation.
Facing a similar IP matter?
Arctic Invent is a specialist IP firm with deep litigation expertise across India, EU, US, and UK. Our team uses data-driven strategy to build stronger cases.