Other sector

OTEC v Steros (UPC_CoA_581/2025)

Decision date:

10 July 2025

Court
Court of Appeal
Patent
EP 4 249 647

Full decision available here:

Osborne Clarke summary

  • At first instance, Steros filed an application for provisional measures asserting claims against OTEC for infringement of its patent (EP 647) before the Hamburg LD. The application for preliminary measures was granted.
  • OTEC filed an appeal against the order, requesting that the order be suspended pending the outcome of the appeal under Article 74(1) UPCA and Rule 223.2 RoP.
  • The Court of Appeal rejected OTEC's request for suspensive effect. The Court of Appeal can grant an application for suspensive effective only if the circumstances of the case justify an exception to the principle that the appeal has no suspensive effect. Exceptional circumstances are assessed having regard to the relevant circumstances of the case and they must be submitted by the applicant. It must be examined whether, on the basis of these circumstances, the appellant's interest in maintaining the status quo until the decision on its appeal exceptionally outweighs the respondent's interest. The Court of Appeal stated that an example where suspensive effect may be granted is where the appealed order is manifestly erroneous.
  • In this case, the Court of Appeal found that OTEC's application did not provide evidence of exceptional circumstances that would justify the appeal having suspensive effect.
  • OTEC claimed that the Hamburg LD made an erroneous finding of infringement and validity, a wrong assumption of objective necessity, an incorrect balance of interests and an incorrect decision on security. The Court of Appeal concluded that OTEC had failed to demonstrate that the Hamburg LD's findings constituted manifest errors: that is, factual findings or legal considerations that are clearly untenable even on that basis of a summary assessment. Whether the order was based on errors would be a matter for the Court of Appeal to decide in the main appeal proceedings. Accordingly, the court held that OTEC's interests did not outweigh Steros' interests or the principles of due process.

Issue

Procedural
Provisional measures

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.