2026-06-22 - LD Munich - Nokia Technologies Oy v. Acer Inc. a.o. - UPC_CFI_868/2025

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: On the mutual withdrawal of an infringement action and the parallel revocation counterclaim, the Munich Local Division allowed both withdrawals under R. 265.1/.2 RoP, neither party having a legitimate interest in a substantive decision. The Court confirmed that on withdrawal it must also make a cost-basis decision under Art. 69 UPCA ex officio (following MSG v EJP, UPC_CFI_300/2023), and that the parties' statement that no cost decision was sought meant each bears its own costs. On court-fee reimbursement, the Court held that the version of R. 370.9 RoP applicable is fixed by the date the withdrawal application was filed — applications filed after 31 December 2025 fall under the new version (following four Court of Appeal decisions) — and expressly declined to follow the divergent view of the Mannheim Local Division. It then refused reimbursement to both parties: the defendants had no statutory ground because their counterclaim withdrawal post-dated the close of the written procedure, and the claimant, though eligible under R. 370.9(b) RoP, was refused in the exercise of the Court's R. 370.9(e) discretion because the case was at an advanced stage with the hearing less than a week away.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Website

Aktenzeichen: UPC_CFI_868/2025