2024-06-21 - LD The Hague - Amycel v. Anonymisiert (vertr. Michal PRZYLUSKI) - UPC_CFI_195/2024
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_195/2024
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division
- Art:
- Application Order
- Parteien:
- Spyra v. Amycel LLC
Kernaussage: R.
2024-06-21 - LD The Hague - Amycel
v.
Anonymisiert (vertr. Michal PRZYLUSKI) - UPC_CFI_195/2024
R. 109.1 RoP request rejected. R. 109.4 RoP request granted. Double appropriateness-test.
notable
The Hague Local Division, sitting as judge-rapporteur, refined the framework for simultaneous interpretation requests under R. 109 RoP by articulating a 'double appropriateness-test': the court must decide (i) whether interpretation at the oral hearing is appropriate at all and (ii) whether the resulting costs should become costs of the proceedings under R. 150 RoP. Applying this test, the JR held that the threshold for allowing interpretation (R. 109.1) is low and even lower for self-paid interpretation (R. 109.4), but that cost-shifting to the proceedings requires more. Because Polish is not an official or designated language of any UPC Contracting Member State or division, and because the defendant had deliberately expanded his business into UPC territory, the court refused to shift the interpretation costs but authorised self-funded interpretation under R. 109.4. The order also signals that recovery of such self-funded costs at the end of the proceedings is not categorically excluded where fairness demands it.
Stichwörter
R. 109 RoP