On 13 September 2024, the Munich Local Division (LD) granted a permanent injunction based on a standard essential patent (SEP) against Belkin and several of its corporate officers.
Belkin appealed this decision and filed an application for suspensive effect according to Article 74 UPCA and RoP 223.
On 29 October 2024, the UPC Court of Appeal (CoA) suspended the effects of the order of 13 September 2024 towards Belkin’s corporate officers, considering that the Munich LD made a blatant error in law.
Key takeaways:
- The CoA refers to its caselaw reminding that if appeals do not have suspensive effect, the CoA can decide otherwise in particular if the order which is appealed holds manifestly erroneous.
- Belkin’s corporate officers had been held intermediaries under the meaning of Article 63(1) UPCA, but the CoA decides that as they represent the company they are not “third parties” to Belkin, held liable for infringement.
- The CoA therefore concludes that Munich LD has made a manifest error of law in finding the corporate officers infringers of the enforced patent, which justifies maintaining the statu quo prior to the order until the appeal is decided.
- Suspensive effect of the appeal is therefore granted only in consideration of the enforcement of the order of 13 September 2024 against the corporate officers whilst the order remains provisionally enforceable towards other parties.
