1. Key takeaways
Art. 83(3) UPCA must be interpreted such that a valid opt out application requires that it is lodged by or on behalf of all proprietors of all national parts of a European patent
According to R.5.1(b) RoP an opt-out must be made in relation to all national parts of an EP patent. In addition, R.5.1(a) RoP first sentence, requires that all proprietors or applicants of a patent or application must lodge the opt-out Application. This Rule is not surpassing the scope of Art. 83(3) UPCA, as this Article must be interpreted to mean that all proprietors of or all applicants for a European patent file the opt-out declaration. Otherwise, the opt-out is invalid.
2. Division
Court of Appeal Luxembourg
3. UPC number
UPC_CoA_79/2024
4. Type of proceedings
Appeal according to 220.2 RoP
5. Parties
Appellant/Defendant in the main proceedings before the court of first instance:
- Neo Wireless GmbH & Co KG (Ratingen, DE)
Respondent/Claimant in the main proceedings before the court of first instance:
- Toyota Motor Europe NV/SA (Evere, BE)
6. Patent(s)
EP 3876490
7. Body of legislation / Rules
- Art. 83 (3) RoP
- R. 1 RoP
- R. 5.1 RoP
- R. 190 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.