2026-09-10 - CoA - Dainese v. Alpinestars et al. - UPC-COA-0000097/2026
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC-COA-0000097/2026
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU)
- Art:
- Order
- Parteien:
- Dainese S.p.A. v. Motocard Bike S.L., Alpinestars S.p.A., Alpinestars Research S.p.A.
Kernaussage: The judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal refused to treat an appeal as manifestly inadmissible because the court fee reached the Court after the appeal period had run.
2026-09-10 - CoA - Dainese
v.
Alpinestars et al. - UPC-COA-0000097/2026
notable
The judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal refused to treat an appeal as manifestly inadmissible because the court fee reached the Court after the appeal period had run. R. 15.2 RoP, which applies to appeals mutatis mutandis through R. 228 RoP, means that the appeal is not deemed lodged until the fee is paid and that the later steps of the procedure follow only then; it does not make the date of payment the date of lodging, and it does not say that an appeal is inadmissible if the fee arrives after the appeal period. The Rules provide an additional fourteen days at several points, and for an appeal the Registry must invite payment within fourteen days under R. 229.2(b) RoP; only a failure to pay within that period makes the appeal deemed not lodged under R. 229.4 RoP. The transfer order here was given inside that period, so the appeal and the fee were both in time. The Court added that an interim award of costs can be granted only with a final decision or a final order, so no costs were decided.