air up v Guangzhou (UPC_CFI_508/2023 & UPC_CFI_509/2023)
Decision date:
09 January 2025
Osborne Clarke summary
- This was a pair of decisions by default in infringement proceedings brought by air up against Guangzhou with respect to two patents protecting a drinking device.
- The statements of claim were served on Guangzhou in accordance with Rule 275.2 RoP, with a letter warning it that a decision by default may be given if it failed to respond. Guangzhou failed to respond so air up sought a preliminary injunction and a decision by default.
- On the basis that the patents at issue were European patents, pursuant to case law there is a presumption of validity and therefore the patents benefit from the full scope of protection provided by Directive 2004/48 (IP enforcement directive). The Munich LD also held that Guangzhou's products infringed both patents.
- As such, air up's request for provisional measures was found to be necessary and proportionate. air up's application had been filed without undue delay and Guangzhou's infringing activities were said to be capable of causing "considerable and long-term damage" to air up.
- Guangzhou was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings and the UPC's registry was instructed to publish the orders on the court website with the names of the parties and the file number so it could be found under the decisions published on the website.
- The decision relating to EP 305 can be found here.
Issue
Curious about how UPC decisions might impact your business? Have questions about the UPC?
Reach out to our patents team for expert guidance and support.