2026-07-16 - LD Hamburg - Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung v. Acer et al. - UPC-CFI-0002231/2025

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: In an SEP infringement action in which the defendants raised a FRAND defence, the Hamburg Local Division granted the patent holder's application under R. 190.1 RoP for an order requiring a third party — the administrator of the patent pool covering the standard in suit — to produce the comparable licence agreements it had concluded on behalf of the pool licensors. The judge-rapporteur restated the settled framework: R. 190 RoP read with Art. 59 UPCA empowers the Court to order production of specified evidence in the control of a party or third party where the applicant has presented reasonably available and plausible evidence, its purpose being to give the party bearing the burden of proof access to the tools for discharging it, and the Court of First Instance enjoys a margin of discretion that extends to the order in which questions are decided under R. 334(e) RoP and may turn on the stage of the proceedings. Because the applicant was undisputedly not in possession of the agreements, the third party could not release them absent a court order under its own confidentiality clauses, and both the defendants and the third party had expressly declared they did not object, the Court held that its discretion fell to be exercised in favour of granting the request — production levelling the playing field between the parties on the FRAND issue. The third party's interests under R. 190.5 RoP were safeguarded by the confidentiality regime to which the applicant had itself conditioned its request, restricting access to UPC representatives, external advisers and experts, and a maximum of three party representatives subject to a two-year licensing-negotiation bar.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Website

Aktenzeichen: UPC-CFI-0002231/2025