2026-03-27 - CoA - NUC Electronics et al. v. Hurom et al. - UPC_CoA_409/2025 UPC_CoA_410/2025 UPC_CoA_420/2025

(i) In UPC proceedings, which are organized by electronic procedures (Art. 44 UPCA) in which written pleadings and other documents shall be lodged in electronic form (R. 4.1 RoP), the first step to be taken by the UPC representative appointed by a Party is, using the served access code provided by the Registry to said Party, to log onto the case file in the Case Management System. (ii) This first step enables the Party and its representative to have access to the file and to be aware of the case. The mere access to the file, before any active step or defense, is however not sufficient to establish a deliberate choice regarding the jurisdiction of the UPC. Another step is required in order to constitute the entering of an appearance within the meaning of Art. 26(1) Brussels Ia Regulation. (iii) It is only when the defendant lodges its first statement, by filing a Preliminary objection pursuant to R. 19 RoP as to the issues listed in R. 19.1 and .4 RoP or, if not, the Statement of defence pursuant to R. 23 ff. RoP as to the substance of the dispute, that he will have deliberately chosen or contested the international jurisdiction of the court seized instead of the court which would normally have jurisdiction under the provisions laid down in Brussels Ia Regulation.

CoA (full five-judge panel led by President Grabinski) sets aside Mannheim LD's infringement decision. The CoA reinterprets claim feature [1N] ('longitudinally fixed') as requiring fixation that prevents vertical lifting of the housing, not merely lateral movement. The attacked juicer (NUC AUTO10) is held only by weight — no engagement hooks or vertical fixation — so claim 1 is not infringed. Separately, the CoA establishes a three-step framework for 'entering appearance' under Art. 26(1) Brussels Ia in UPC electronic proceedings: (1) CMS login is necessary but insufficient; (2) a deliberate choice requires filing a Preliminary objection or Statement of defence; (3) Art. 26(1) Brussels Ia prevails over R. 19.7 RoP for international jurisdiction.