2026-05-13 - CoA - MediaTek et al. v. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan - UPC-COA-0000052/2026

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: The standing judge of the Court of Appeal granted Huawei's R. 220.3 RoP discretionary review of an LK München Panel 2 decision that had upheld a judge-rapporteur's R. 262.1(b) RoP file-access order in favour of law firm Quinn Emanuel and held that the R. 333.1 RoP request for panel review was inadmissible. The CoA identified two fundamental legal questions warranting clarification: whether a judge-rapporteur's R. 262.1(b) RoP decision is subject to panel review under R. 333 RoP, and which provision of R. 220 RoP governs an appeal against such a decision. The standing judge noted an explicit divergence between LK München (no R. 333 review available) and LK Paris in Gowling v Merz und Viatris (UPC_CFI_697/2025, 19 February 2026) (R. 333 review available). The discretionary-review standard set out in Motorola v Ericsson and Centripetal v Keysight was applied. The appeal is admitted; Huawei must pay the €2,700 fee difference; the order expressly does not prejudge appeal admissibility under R. 220.2 ff. RoP.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Website

Aktenzeichen: UPC-COA-0000052/2026