Case Law
Article 42: Proportionality and fairness

Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU), Order dated 24/03/2025, Amazon Europe Core S.à.r.l.; Amazon EU S.à r.l.; Amazon.com, Inc. v. Nokia Technologies Oy (Case/ Registry number: App_13834/2025, ORD_14282/2025)
Example of decision on the principle of fair and equitable conduct of proceedings: "2. It is fundamentally inconsistent with this procedure to give the appellant the opportunity to submit a written statement merely a few days before the oral hearing in order to counter the respondent’s legal arguments presented in the statement of response, as the oral hearing is specifically intended to serve that purpose. 3. A request by the appellant for leave to submit a written statement concerning matters that only became known to them shortly before or after the expiry of the time limit for the statement of grounds of appeal under Rule 224.2(b) in conjunction with Rule 220.1(c) RoP may, in any event, be rejected in the interest of ensuring fair and equitable proceedings - particularly under the principle of equality of arms - if the appellant, despite having been aware of the relevant circumstances for several weeks, files the request merely a few days before the oral hearing, thereby preventing, due to time constraints, the respondent from being afforded an opportunity to reply in writing."

Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Local Division, Order dated 14/06/2023, OERLIKON TEXTILE GMBH & CO KG v BHAGAT GROUP (Case number UPC_CFI_141/2023, ORD_500982/2023)
Example of decision allowing measures preserving evidence: “In application of the general principle of proportionality established by articles 41 and 42, UPCA, and the comparison of conflicting interests also in the choice of implementing measures, held account that the measure will have to be carried out in the context of a trade fair event open to participation of the public, it is specified that the bailiff and the expert must prefer ably proceed, where possible, with the execution at times other than those intended for opening to the public or in any case with a lower flow at the respondent’s stand.”