Casalonga UPC rules of procedure
Powered by Casalonga

Rule 38Written procedure when the central division deals with a Counterclaim for revocation under Article 33(3)(b) of the Agreement

When a Counterclaim for revocation is referred to the central division, it shall be dealt with as follows:

(a) Rule 17.2 and .3 [1] shall apply Rule 17.2 and .3 – Recording in the register and assignment (Court of First Instance, infringement action);

(b) Rule 18 [2] shall apply mutatis mutandis: the presiding judge of the panel to which the Counterclaim for revocation has been assigned shall designate one legally qualified judge of the panel as judge-rapporteur;

(c) The judge-rapporteur shall give any further directions necessary for the future conduct of the written procedure before the central division;

(d) Rule 28 [[-
As soon as practicable after service of the Statement of defence, the judge-rapporteur shall, after consulting the parties, set a date and time for an interim conference (where necessary [Rule 101.1]) and set
...
Please login to continue reading.


Registering with the site

You have requested to take part in a forum reserved for registered visitors.

Personal identifiers

Enter your personal information here. You will receive a registration confirmation shortly by email. Such email may have been considered as spam. If you do not find it in your inbox nor in your spam, please send an email to contact@upc-casalonga.eu.

(Your password must contain at least 6 characters.)

Required fields are indicated with a « * »


New visitor ?

Subscribe


[1-
2. The action shall be assigned to a panel of a division according to Rule 345.3. Where requested by the parties the action shall be assigned to a single judge in accordance with Rule 345.6.
3. The following shall determine the distribution of actions between the seat of the central division and its sections.
(a) Where an action involves a single patent having a single classification, the Registry shall allocate the action to the seat or the section of the central division appropriate to the classification of the patent according to Annex II of the Agreement. The Registry shall assign the action to a panel in accordance with Rule 345.3.
(b) Where an action involves more than one patent and a majority of the patents have a single classification appropriate to the seat or a single section of the central division according to Annex II of the Agreement, the Registry shall allocate the action to the seat or that section of the central division. The Registry shall assign the action to a panel in accordance with Rule 345.3.
(c) Where neither paragraph (a) nor (b) applies, especially where
(i) the action involves a single patent having more than one classification or
(ii) where the action involves more than one patent and no majority of the patents have a single classification corresponding to the seat or to one of the sections of the central division,
the Registry shall assign the action in accordance with Rule 345.3 to the panel at the seat or the section appropriate to the first classification of either the single patent or, where the action involves more than one patent, the patent first listed in the Statement of claim, according to Annex II of the Agreement. If the presiding judge of the respective panel considers that the reference of the action is appropriate, he shall accept it. If he considers otherwise, he shall instruct the Registry to refer the action in accordance with Rule 345.3 to the presiding judge of a panel of either the seat or the other section of the central division he considers appropriate, who shall likewise consider whether the re-allocation of the action is appropriate. If that presiding judge considers otherwise, he shall inform the President of the Court of First Instance, who shall allocate the action to the seat or the section of the central division he considers appropriate. The Registry shall assign the action to a panel in accordance with Rule 345.3.

[2-
The presiding judge of the panel to which the action has been assigned [Rule 17.2] shall designate one legally qualified judge of the panel as judge-rapporteur. The presiding judge may designate himself as judge-rapporteur. The Registry shall as soon as practicable notify the claimant and defendant of the identity of the judge-rapporteur.