1. Key takeaways
No opportunity for parties to make suggestions on (technical) background of one of the judges allocated to the panel
Defendant's application for a review of the allocation of a technically qualified judge in order to allocate another technically qualified judge with experience in the field of mechanical engineering is dismissed.
The technically qualified judge is one of the judges of the panel as defined in Articles 19 and 20 UPCA (concerning the Court of First Instance) and the legal texts governing the UPC do not provide the opportunity for the parties to "make suggestion regarding (...) the technical or other relevant background" of one of the judges allocated to the panel, unlike in the case of the appointment of a court expert (R 185.2 RoP). The only ground on which a party may object to a judge taking part in the proceedings is provided for by the provisions of the Article 7.4 UPCA relating to partiality.
2. Division
Duesseldorf Local Division
3. UPC number
UPC_CFI_368/2024
4. Type of proceedings
Application for provisional measures
5. Parties
Valeo Electrification (Applicant in the main proceedings, respondent in the procedural application)
Magna entities (Defendants in the main proceedings, applicant in the procedural application; Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG, Magna PT s.r.o., Magna International France, SARL)
6. Patent(s)
EP 3 320 604
7. Body of legislation / Rules
Rule 9(1) RoP
To view the full article, click here.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.