2025-01-15 - LD Milan - Dainese v. Alpinestars - UPC_CFI_472/2024

1. The coordination between the appeals proceedings before the EPO and the proceedings before UPC may be achieved in the most efficient way, taking into account the position of all parties, for instance by extending the time limits for filing the statement of defence and the counterclaim for revocation, allowing for a more overall procedural efficiency, on one hand not staying the proceedings – in the power of the Court- and on the other hand waiting for the upcoming EPO’s decision. 2. On a reasoned request, the other parties may be granted a deadline within which to submit their observations on the EPO's decision, in accordance with the procedural faculty provided for in Rule 36 of the Rules of Procedure. It follows that the solution adopted does not violate the adversarial principle and complies with the equality of the parties in the right of defence. The principle of efficiency is therefore guaranteed, at the same time guaranteeing the right to a full adversarial principle, which takes the form of knowledge and examination of the decisions of the EPO.

The Milan Local Division granted a deadline extension to allow for observations on an upcoming EPO decision. The Court stated that this did not violate the adversarial principle and simultaneously guaranteed the principle of efficiency. The respondent of the application had claimed that the extension was effectively a stay of proceedings.