2025-01-08 - CD Paris - Meril v. Edwards Lifesciences - UPC_CFI_189/2024

1. For the purpose of interpreting Rule 150 ‘RoP’, a “decision on the merits” must be understood as a decision that concludes litigation proceedings, that is proceedings where the ascertainment of a right is sought by one party against another and is capable of producing the effects of res judicata on conflicting subjective positions. 2. The proceedings initiated by the request by a member of the public to have access to the register cannot be considered as litigation in a technical sense even if the application introduces an adversarial phase as it is merely instrumental to the purpose of enhancing transparency in the judicial activity, aims to the protection of the general and collective interest of the public and not to the protection of the particular interests of the applicant or of the parties in the main dispute and the Court's intervention is primarily administrative in nature, lacking the characteristics of a judgment with res judicata effects on conflicting subjective positions.

The Paris Central Division dismissed an application for a cost decision following a request for file access by a third party. The court explained that Rule 150 required a decision on the merits which was to interpreted as a decision concluding litigation. Proceedings for access to the register could not be considered litigation as it does not aim at the protection of particular interests but rather the protection of the general and collective interest of the public.