2026-05-19 - CD Milan - La Siddhi Consultancy v. Athena Pharmaceutiques et al. - UPC-CFI-0000927/2025

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: The Milan Central Division (Section) ruled on the Claimant's R. 262A RoP application for an 'external eyes only' confidentiality regime over the unredacted version of exhibit MW21 — a third-party agreement on which the Claimant relies to demonstrate 'concern by the patent' under Art. 47.6 UPCA. The Court rejected the primary 'attorneys eyes only' request, holding that the CoA framework (Sun v Vivo and Daedalus v Xiaomi) requires at least one natural person per party to have access unless exceptional circumstances justify deviation — and that confidential information allowing 'conclusions to be drawn' is the ordinary case for Art. 58 UPCA, not an exception. Auxiliary request granted in modified form: external representatives, one named Head of Legal (single person designated for both Defendants), and ONE named Indian external counsel out of two requested. Experts/consultants 'upon request' refused — they must be named in advance. The Court declined to extend the confidentiality regime to the Claimant's side (no legitimate interest shown), rejected a 'return or destroy at end of proceedings' clause for lack of legal basis (following Promosome v BioNTech), and held that there is no legal basis for a cost decision in R. 262A proceedings.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Website

Aktenzeichen: UPC-CFI-0000927/2025