2025-04-16 - LD Munich - Emboline v. Aorticlab - UPC_CFI_628/2024
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_628/2024
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division
- Art:
- Application Order
- Parteien:
- Emboline, Inc. v. AorticLab
Kernaussage: 1.
2025-04-16 - LD Munich - Emboline
v.
Aorticlab - UPC_CFI_628/2024
1. The one who files a counterclaim for revocation (Art. 32 (1) e) UPCA) is an “Applicant” according to Art. 69 (4) UPCA.
2. Anyone who claims that he would be driven into insolvency in case of an injunction to desist, confirms that his financial position gives rise to a legitimate and real concern that a possible order for costs may not be recoverable.
The Munich Local Division ordered the Defendant in an infringement action to provide a security for legal costs following the Statement of Defense in which the Defendant claimed that an injunction to desist would drive them into insolvency.
Stichwörter
applicant, security for costs;, insolvency