2026-01-30 - LD Mannheim - Fujifilm v. Kodak - UPC_CFI_365/2023

The Mannheim Local Division, sitting as a panel on review under R. 333 RoP, confirmed the Judge-rapporteur's second enforcement penalty order against Kodak. It held first that R. 354.4 RoP does not reserve an enforcement order to the full panel: the phrase 'first instance panel of the division' allocates the case internally rather than naming a panel act under R. 1.2(a) RoP, so the Judge-rapporteur may decide and panel review under R. 333 RoP is available as an intermediate step before appeal. On the merits it held that an information order enforcing manufacture in the territory of protection reaches the revenues causally linked to that manufacture, exports included, and that a defendant must obtain the information from other entities of its group rather than plead its corporate structure. It ordered verification by a sworn auditor, extended the recall to insolvent customers and to stock beyond its stated shelf life, and required destruction of evidentiary samples subject to a pragmatic cut-out. Extensive obiter separates international jurisdiction from enforceability: a UPC decision has immediate effect only in the Contracting Member States, and outside them requires recognition by the competent national court before any enforcement request is ripe.