2026-10-26 - CD Munich - Reel v. Fives ECL - UPC-CFI-0002296/2025
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC-CFI-0002296/2025
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Central Division - Section
- Art:
- Order
- Parteien:
- REEL International v. Fives ECL
Kernaussage: In a revocation action against the German, French and Dutch parts of an expired European patent, the patentee objected that the claimant parent company was barred by the res judicata of final German nullity decisions against its wholly owned subsidiary, and asked for the parties…
2026-10-26 - CD Munich - Reel
v.
Fives ECL - UPC-CFI-0002296/2025
routine
In a revocation action against the German, French and Dutch parts of an expired European patent, the patentee objected that the claimant parent company was barred by the res judicata of final German nullity decisions against its wholly owned subsidiary, and asked for the parties' legal experts to be heard in person. The Munich Central Division held the request admissible under R. 176, R. 177.1 and R. 181 RoP but rejected it, because Art. 53(2) UPCA limits the hearing of experts to what is necessary. After the Court of Appeal's Heraeus v Vibrantz decision, the law governing the res judicata effect of the German decision (§§ 322, 325 ZPO) was common ground; whether the claimant is a straw man is a question of law on which the Court was sufficiently informed by the detailed written opinions; and the effect of expiry and of the patentee's covenant not to sue on the claimant's interest to act falls to the Court's own assessment under Art. 47(6) UPCA, not to German law. The admissibility objections themselves remain for the oral hearing.
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).