UPC_CFI_191/2025; UPC_CFI_617/2025 – Genevant v Moderna

Court
Local Division The Hague
Date
Outcome
Partially Granted
Sector
Pharma/Bio
Decision Type
SETTLEMENT

Expert Commentary

Return of court fee Facts 1. Infringement and counterclaim for revocation proceedings. 2. The parties have settled. The Court 1. The Court grants the request for withdrawal of their respective actions. 2. Instead of 50% return of the court fees, the Court orders reimbursement of only 25% as the very substantial written proceedings had almost ended and the JR and the Court had to deal with substantial R. 19 RoP proceedings, as well as a revision thereof and a large number of applications. Comment The Court is a self-financed institution and I applaud The Hague Local Division for not returning the standard 50% given the exceptional quantity of work they had to do in this case. The Rules on reimbursement allow such exceptions, and the use of R. 370.9(e) RoP was fully justified in this case.

Full Decision Text

The Hague - Local Division UPC-CFI-191/2025 UPC-CFI-617/2025 Decision of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court issued on 25/08/2026 regarding: withdrawal **CLAIMANT** 1) Genevant Sciences GmbH ViaduktStrasse 8 4051 Basel Switzerland 2) Arbutus Biopharma Corporation 701 Veterans Circle 18974 Warminster, Pennsylvania United States of America Claimants are represented by M.G.R. van Gardingen, K.M.L. Bijvank, H.W.J. Lambers, E.A.I. Lots, Dr. F. Lahrtz **DEFENDANT** 1) Moderna, Inc. 325 Binney Street MA 02142, Cambridge United States of America 2) MODERNATX, INC. 325 Binney Street MA 02142, Cambridge United States of America 3) MODERNA SWITZERLAND GMBH Peter Merian-Weg 10 4052 Basel Switzerland 4) MODERNA NETHERLANDS B.V. Claude Debussylaan 7 1082 MC Amsterdam The Netherlands 5) MODERNA BIOTECH SPAIN, S.L. C/ Julián Camarillo 31 28037 Madrid Spain 6) MODERNA GERMANY GMBH Brienner Straße 45 a-d. c/o Design Offices Campus Königsplatz 80333 Munich Germany 7) MODERNA FRANCE SASU 19 Rue Cognacq-Jay 75007 Paris France 8) MODERNA ITALY SRL Via Vidorio Veneto 54/B CAP 00187 Rome Italy 9) MODERNA BELGIUM SRL Avenue Marnix 23 1000 Brussels Belgium 10) MODERNA DENMARK APS C/O CSC (DENMARK) ApS Sundkrogsgade 21 2100 Copenhagen Denmark 11) MODERNA SWEDEN AB c/o Scandinavian Trust AB Birger Jarlsgatan 12 114 34 Stockholm Sweden 12) MODERNA NORWAY AS c/o CSC (Norway) AS Wergelandsveien 7 0167 Oslo Norway 13) MODERNA PORTUGAL UNIPESSOAL, LD Rua João Chagas 10-B DTO 1500-493 Lisbon Portugal 14) MODERNA POLAND SP. Z O.O Rondo Ignacego Daszyńskiego 1 -843 Warsaw Poland 15) MODERNA BIOTECH UK LIMITED 54 Portland Place W1B 1DY London United Kingdom Represented by R. Laddé (Defendants 1-2, 4-15) and J. Renken (Defendant 3) **PATENT AT ISSUE** Patent no. Proprietor/s EP2279254 Arbutus Biopharma Corporation **DECIDING JUDGE** FULL PANEL Presiding judge Edger Brinkman Judge-rapporteur Margot Kokke Legally qualified judge Samuel Granata Technically qualified judge Xavier Dorland-Galliot LANGUAGE OF PROCEEDINGS: English Subject-matter of the proceedings: Infringement proceedings and counterclaim for revocation **POINTS AT ISSUE AND GROUNDS** 1. Claimants and defendants request withdrawal of their respective claims (UPC-CFI-191/2025 for the infringement action and UPC-CFI-617/2025 for the counterclaim for revocation) pursuant to R.265.1 RoP because they have reached a settlement. They request the court to declare the proceedings closed. 2. All parties consent to the closure of both actions, evidenced by the signatures from representatives of both sides on the request. 3. The application is admissible as there is no final decision in the action. The request will be granted. The registry shall be instructed to register the closure of the action in the register. 4. Parties confirmed that a cost decision is not required in both actions, apart from reimbursement of court fees. 5. The Parties request reimbursement of the court fees pursuant to Rule 370.9(b) RoP in both actions. The requests are admissible, as the written procedure was still ongoing at the time of the withdrawal, since the Defendants had not yet submitted their Rejoinder to the Application to Amend. Pursuant to case law of the Court of Appeal, the Rules of Procedure as amended on 1 January 2026 apply, because the application (for withdrawal and reimbursement) was filed in 2026. Under the applicable rule, the Parties are entitled to reimbursement of 50% of the court fees. However, in this case the court deems the situation exceptional and sees reason to decrease the reimbursement payable to 25% (R.370.9(e) RoP). The exceptional character is due to (i) the fact that the settlement was reached almost at the end of the written phase when all but one of six written submissions had been exchanged (only the rejoinder regarding the application to amend was not filed) (ii) the large number of applications filed by the parties and (iii) the considerable number of orders issued by the court, including a R.19 RoP order and a R.333 RoP revision thereof. The requests are therefore granted only to that extent. The Registry is instructed to reimburse 25% of the court fees paid in both actions. **ORDER** The court: 1. allows the withdrawal of infringement action UPC-CFI-191 and counterclaim in revocation UPC-CFI-617/2025. 2. declares those proceedings closed; 3. orders that this decision shall be entered on the register (R.265.2(b)); 4. orders the registry to reimburse the claimants in both actions 25% of the respective court fees paid; 5. declares that there is no further need for cost decisions. Brinkman, presiding judge Granata, legally qualified judge Kokke, judge rapporteur Kokke, on behalf of Dorland-Galliot, technically qualified judge For the Deputy Registrar, clerk

Key Holdings

  • Upon settlement, the Court may order reimbursement of court fees.
  • The standard 50% reimbursement may be reduced if the Court has undertaken substantial work (e.g., extensive written proceedings, R. 19 RoP proceedings, numerous applications).
  • The Rules of Procedure allow for exceptions to the standard reimbursement rates, such as under R. 370.9(e) RoP.

Tags

  • Court Fees
  • Reimbursement
  • Settlement
  • Procedural Workload
  • Withdrawal

Related Cases

View original decision