2026-07-10 - CoA - Adobe et al. v. KEEEX - UPC-COA-0000095/2026
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC-COA-0000095/2026
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU)
- Art:
- Order
- Parteien:
- Adobe Inc., Adobe Systems Software Ireland Limited v. KEEEX SAS
Kernaussage: The standing judge of the Court of Appeal refused a discretionary review under R.
2026-07-10 - CoA - Adobe et al.
v.
KEEEX - UPC-COA-0000095/2026
notable
The standing judge of the Court of Appeal refused a discretionary review under R. 220.3 RoP of a Paris Local Division panel order that had allowed the claimant to introduce a EUR 120 million provisional-damages claim (R. 119 RoP) in its Reply. Restating the established threshold (Motorola v Ericsson; Centripetal v Keysight), the Court held that discretionary review is warranted only where the contested first-instance order is manifestly erroneous and raises a fundamental point of law whose review is necessary for the consistent application and interpretation of the RoP. Neither limb was met: the questions raised were all fact-bound and the LD order was not manifestly erroneous. In particular, the claimant's interim-conference undertaking to determine final damages in separate R. 125 proceedings did not waive a provisional R. 119 claim — expressly contemplated in the procedural order — and the high absolute amount did not alter the claim's provisional character; nor was its introduction in the Reply late or unfairly prejudicial.
Inoffiziell
Inoffizielle KI-Übersetzung
Dies ist eine automatische, von KI erstellte Übersetzung, die Fehler enthalten kann. Rechtsverbindlich ist allein das Originaldokument in der Verfahrenssprache (French).