2025-09-03 - LD Hamburg - Teleflex Life Sciences Ii v. Speed Care Mineral - UPC_CFI_685/2024

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: The judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division allowed a further exchange of written pleadings under R. 36 RoP after the defendant's rejoinder introduced, for the first time, the composition and function of the constituents of the accused product's printing paste and a new party expert opinion. The Court set out the R. 36 RoP test as a balance between the reasons why a further pleading is said to be necessary and the impact of one on the course of the proceedings and the risk of delay. That a party could have raised the point earlier does not preclude leave: once the opposing side has advanced genuinely new matter, fairness, equity and efficiency require an opportunity to answer it in writing, because commenting at the oral hearing may not suffice and makes the hearing harder to schedule. The requested period was cut from at least six weeks to three, because the applicant had had the material since 30 July 2025, and the defendant was given five weeks in return for reasons of equality of arms.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Case File

Aktenzeichen: UPC_CFI_685/2024