2026-07-16 - CoA - Applicant ***
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU)
- Art:
- Order of the President of the CoA of the UPC
- Parteien:
- Applicant ***
Kernaussage: - An application to obtain confirmation of the Applicant’s registration on the list of entitled representatives under Art.
2026-07-16 - CoA - Applicant ***
- An application to obtain confirmation of the Applicant’s registration on the list of entitled representatives under Art. 48(3) UPC Agreement is admissible in accordance with Rules 13 et seq. and Rules 17 et seq. EPLC Rules.
- Such an application requires clear and convincing evidence that a respective application has been filed in the Court Management System (CMS) of the UPC, as it is and has been mandatory that all such applications be filed in the CMS, unless the CMS has ceased to function, Rule 4 UPC Rules of Procedure (RoP).
- In that regard it is for the Applicant to submit all evidence available to him that he filed an application for registration on the list of entitled representatives under Art. 48(3) UPC Agreement.
- And, as only the Registrar has access to the CMS, it is for the Registrar to carry out a search in the CMS to ascertain whether an application for registration on the list of entitled representatives under Art. 48(3) UPC Agreement was filed by the Applicant.
notable
The President of the Court of Appeal rejected a petition for review of the Registrar's refusal to confirm that the Applicant was already registered on the list of entitled representatives under Art. 48(3) UPCA. Because the EPLC Rules contain no express procedure for an application seeking mere confirmation of an existing registration (as opposed to a new registration), the President held that Rules 13 et seq. and Rules 17 et seq. EPLC Rules apply mutatis mutandis to fill that gap, applicants having a legitimate interest in clarifying their status. On the merits, such a confirmation application requires clear and convincing evidence that the underlying registration application was filed in the Court Management System, filing through the CMS being mandatory under Rule 4 RoP unless the CMS has ceased to function. The evidential burden is shared: the Applicant must produce all evidence available to him, while the Registrar — as the only party with CMS access — must search the CMS. Correspondence with the UPC Service Desk about how to file, without any evidence of an actual CMS filing and without the system-generated registration confirmation that all duly registered representatives received, did not meet that standard.
Stichwörter
EPLC Rules