2026-06-12 - CD Milan - Insulet v. EOFLOW - UPC-CFI-0001230/2026

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: Ruling on Insulet's cost application under R. 150 et seq. RoP, the Milan Central Division (judge-rapporteur Postiglione) ordered EOFlow to pay EUR 14,000 of the costs of resisting EOFlow's late leave-to-appeal request (UPC_CFI_1167/2025) and its appeal against a penalty order (UPC_CoA_930/2025). The Court held the application timely under R. 151.1 RoP (the one-month period running from the decisions concluding each proceeding) and confirmed that a leave-to-appeal request is ancillary to the first-instance proceedings, so its costs fall under Art. 69 UPCA, while the earlier EUR 10,000 award did not cover them. In R. 150-proceedings the Court determines only the recoverable amount, not the in-principle allocation. The applicable ceiling (EUR 38,000) followed from the value of the proceedings under R. 370.6 RoP — the objective economic interest being the EUR 150,000 penalty at stake — but the ceiling is a maximum only; assessing reasonableness (necessity) and proportionality (amount) cumulatively, the limited procedural issues justified only EUR 10,000 (appeal) and EUR 4,000 (leave-to-appeal). Finally, the Court held that confidentiality under Art. 58 UPCA / R. 262A / 262.2 RoP does not cover ordinary cost narratives and invoices, dismissing the confidentiality requests and refusing the costs of filing them.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Website

Aktenzeichen: UPC-CFI-0001230/2026