2024-05-15 - LD Hamburg - Ballinno v. Kinexon Sports Media et al. - UPC_CFI_151/2024
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_151/2024
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Hamburg (DE) Local Division
- Art:
- Application Order
- Parteien:
- Kinexon Sports & Media GmbH, Kinexon GmbH, Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA)
Kernaussage: As Art.
2024-05-15 - LD Hamburg - Ballinno
v.
Kinexon Sports Media et al. - UPC_CFI_151/2024
As Art. 69.4 UPCA explicitly refers to proceedings for the application of provisional measures R. 158 RoP regarding security for costs of a party is applicable in PI proceedings as well.
When deciding on the request to provide for a security, the insolvency risk of the plaintiff is the relevant factor, not the enforcement risk, especially when it comes to a claimant, who is domiciled within the EU.
The adequate security has to be based on the amount of the legal costs and other expenses incurred and/or to be incurred, not any other financial harm.
notable
In the Ballinno v UEFA/Kinexon provisional-measures proceedings before the EURO 2024 tournament, the Hamburg Local Division held that Art. 69(4) UPCA and R. 158 RoP are applicable to proceedings for provisional measures, and that for EU-domiciled claimants the relevant factor for ordering security for costs is not enforcement risk (UPC judgments being directly enforceable under Art. 82 UPCA and Art. 71a Brussels I Recast) but insolvency risk. On the facts — claimant a Dutch entity with EUR 1 unpaid issued capital, no known assets apart from the patent in suit, and the patent transferred to it only three months before suit and months after pre-trial correspondence between the assignor and the defendants — the Panel found an insolvency risk established and ordered security. The amount was set at EUR 56,000, corresponding to the ceiling for recoverable costs at the preliminary value of EUR 500,000, rather than the EUR 200,000 requested. The Panel refused to allocate a technically qualified judge, considering the physics issues manageable without one and the EURO 2024 time window incompatible with the delay such allocation could cause.
Stichwörter
Request for security, Rule 158 RoP