A guide to the UPC and the UP - Flipbook - Page 258
13-10 Actions involving multiple patents, multiple parties and/or more complex issues may
require additional case management by the judge-rapporteur at the interim stage in
order to make sure they are ready for the oral hearing. In addition, actions involving issues
amenable to preliminary decisions and/or issues deemed to have no prospect of success
may require more active case management.
13-11 Interim conferences are preferably held by telephone or video conference. 24 If, however,
the judge-rapporteur accepts the request of a party to hold an interim conference in Court,
the hearing will be open to the public unless the judge-rapporteur accepts that, to the
extent necessary, the hearing should be confidential in the interests of one or both parties,
a third party or in the general interests of justice or public order. 25 Interim conferences may
be held in any language agreed by the parties’ representatives and will be audio recorded,
although the recording is only made available to the parties and their representatives. 26
Interim Orders
13-12 Following the interim conference, the judge-rapporteur will issue an order setting out all the
decisions taken. 27 The case management orders of the judge-rapporteur are recorded in the
register 28 and served on the parties by the Registry as soon as practicable. 29
13-13 The parties may refer any decision of the judge-rapporteur to the panel for its review and
the judge-rapporteur may also refer any matter to the panel. In addition, the panel of its own
motion may choose to review any decision or order of the judge-rapporteur or the conduct of
the interim procedure. 30 The procedure for such a review is laid out at r.333 RoP, which
requires the lodging of an application for review within 15 days of the service of the order and
the payment of the prescribed fee. 31 This short time frame is intended to comply with the
objective of efficiency 32 and ensure that the proceedings are, to the extent possible, completed
within the three month time frame. The other party shall be given an opportunity to be heard
after which the panel will, as soon as practicable, make any order to vary, revoke or rectify the
original case management order. 33 It should be noted that, as there is no stay of the order
whilst this review is conducted, the party seeking the review will likely wish to make its
application as soon as possible.
13-14 If a party fails to comply with an order of the judge-rapporteur within the time
period specified, the judge-rapporteur can make a decision by default. 34
13-15 An appeal may be brought against certain orders of the judge-rapporteur; orders to produce
evidence 35 are appealable without leave pursuant to r.22o(1)(c) RoP and those relating to
case management are appealable pursuant to r.220(2) RoP. In relation to the latter, leave
is required from the Court of First Instance or, if no such leave is granted with 15 days
of the relevant order, a request for a review must be made to the Court of Appeal within
a further 15 days. 36
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
r.105(1) RoP.
art.45 UPCA and r.105(2) RoP.
rr.105(3) and 106 RoP.
r.105(4) RoP.
r.351(3) RoP.
r.331(4) RoP.
rr.102 and 331(2) RoP.
r.370 RoP. Under the Table of Court Fees of 8 July 2022 the fee for an application to review a case management
order under r.333.3 RoP is €300.
r.101(2) RoP.
rr.333(4), 335 and 353 RoP.
rr.103(2) and 355 RoP.
art.59 UPCA and r.190 RoP.
rr.220(2) and (3) RoP. See chapter 21 (Procedure before the Court of Appeal) paragraphs 21-23, 21-24 and 21-33 to 21-36.
© Bird & Bird LLP | May 2023
A Guide to the UPC and the UP 248
