2024-05-02 - CD Paris - Nokia v. Mala Technologies - UPC_CFI_484/2023
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_484/2023
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat
- Art:
- Application Order
- Parteien:
- Nokia Technology GmbH v. Mala Technologies Ltd.
Kernaussage: In a landmark preliminary-objection ruling, the judge-rapporteur of the Central Division (Paris Seat) held that Articles 29-32 Brussels I Reg recast are not directly applicable to the UPC; their application to the UPC as a 'common court' under Art.
2024-05-02 - CD Paris - Nokia
v.
Mala Technologies - UPC_CFI_484/2023
landmark
In a landmark preliminary-objection ruling, the judge-rapporteur of the Central Division (Paris Seat) held that Articles 29-32 Brussels I Reg recast are not directly applicable to the UPC; their application to the UPC as a 'common court' under Art. 71a Brussels I Reg recast is governed exclusively by Art. 71c(1)-(2). Because Art. 71c(2) requires that the national-court proceedings be brought 'during the transitional period' of Art. 83 UPCA, a revocation action filed at the German Federal Patent Court in April 2021 — some two years before the UPCA entered into force — falls outside that provision. The court refused to apply Art. 71c(2) by analogy: there is no unintended gap in the Brussels I Regulation, because the default position is that sovereign courts and the UPC are jurisdictionally independent, and the interests of claimants who filed before versus during the transitional period are materially different. Consequently the UPC retains jurisdiction; no stay is available under Art. 30(1) Brussels I Reg recast, Art. 33(10) UPCA or R. 295 RoP (the BGH is not poised to deliver a swift decision); and the mere filing of a preliminary objection does not justify a R. 9.3 RoP extension of the R. 49.1 RoP defence deadline. Leave to appeal was granted given the fundamental importance of the issues.
Stichwörter
lis pendens, Art 29-31 Brussels I Reg recast