UPC_CoA: case number pending – BEGA v Washtower
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Date
- Outcome
- Granted
- Sector
- Other
- Decision Type
- PROCEDURAL
Expert Commentary
Extension of term for grounds for appeal Facts 1. The Local Division of The Hague granted an order in PI proceedings of 11 September 2025 issuing a preliminary injunction. 2. Appeal was lodged on 22 September 2025. 3. The deadline for filing the grounds for appeal is 26 September 2025. 4. BEGA requested an extension for their grounds of appeal by two weeks, arguing (unexpected) professional constraints and the fact that one of the two lead attorneys has to attend a hearing at the EPO on 25 and 26 September. Decision of the JR Extension of three working days. Comment 1. As the JR states, this decision will likely not make any difference for the respondents (and will also not lead to delay of the appeal proceedings). 2. However, I think such extensions should not be granted. First of all, why do the representatives ask only on 22 September 2025 for an extension, while the decision is of 11 September 2025 and the grounds of appeal are due on 26 September 2025? This puts pressure on the JR. If they had lodged the request on 11 September 2025, the JR would likely have not given three days. 3. The extension rewards being unorganized. If you have an oral hearing at the EPO, you know the dates of the hearing for months already. If you have to file grounds of appeal in a case you also argued in first instance, you know the case very well. In such a situation, if you start working on the grounds of appeal on 11 September 2025, you can easily be ready by 18 September 2025, leaving almost another week to further prepare the EPO hearing. 4. I am afraid that we will see other representatives following this example. Extensions should only be granted in absolutely extraordinary situations. 5. About being organized! What about the JR: he receives the request on 22 September and gives a decision on 24 September. What if he would have taken 11 days to give a decision?
Full Decision Text
Appeal n°: UPC_CoA: pending PROCEDURAL ORDER of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court issued on 24 September 2025 APPELLANTS (DEFENDANTS IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE) 1. Industriebeteiligungs- und Beratungs GmbH, Pyrmonter Straße 78, 32676 Lügde, Germany (Appellant 1) and Defendant 2) with the CFI); 2. BEGA-Consult Internationale Handelsagentur GmbH & Co KG, Siemensstraße 2 32676 Lügde, Germany (Appellant 2) and Defendant 3) with the CFI); 3. BEGA BBK Sp. z o.o. sp. K,, Poznańska 113A, PL 62-052 Komorniki, Poland (Appellant 3) and Defendant 4) with the CFI); 4. NEG Novex Großhandelsgesellschaft für Elektro- und Haustechnik GmbH, Chenover Straße 5, 67117 Limburgerhof, Germany (Appellant 4) and Defendant 5) with the CFI); hereinafter collectively referred to as “Appellants” represented by Dr. Volkmar Henke, attorneys-at-law, BARDEHLE PAGENBERG Partnership mbB, Hamburg, Germany, and other representatives of that firm RESPONDENTS (APPLICANTS IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE) 1. Washtower IP B.V., Enschedesestraat 300 - 7552 CN - Hengelo – NL (Respondent 1) and Applicant 1) with the CFI) 2. Washtower B.V., Enschedesestraat 300 - 7552 CN - Hengelo – NL (Respondent 2) and Applicant 2) with the CFI) hereinafter collectively referred to as “Respondents” represented by Peter van Schijndel, attorney at law, HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 1 PATENT AT ISSUE EP 3 522 755 DECIDING JUDGE Emmanuel Gougé, Judge-rapporteur LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS English IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE □ Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court, The Hague Local Division, dated 11 September 2025. □ Numbers attributed by the Court of First Instance: UPC_CFI_479/2025 ACT_25599/2025 ORD_36708/2025 SUMMARY OF FACTS AND PARTIES’ REQUESTS 1. Appellants have lodged an appeal against the impugned order on 22 September 2025. 2. While the deadline for lodging their Statement of grounds of appeal expires on Friday 26 September 2025, appellants request the Court of Appeal to extend said deadline by two weeks, i.e. until 10 October 2025, and to decide on said request without delay. 3. Appellants argue that they find themselves in an exceptional situation given that both the lead attorney-at- law and the lead patent attorney for Appellants are unable to devote the necessary time and resources to prepare the grounds of appeal due to various professional constraints, including business travel of team members and an oral hearing before the EPO which one of the two lead attorneys of the Appellants has to attend on 25 and 26 September 2025. GROUNDS 4. According to R. 9.3 lit. (a) RoP, on a reasoned request by a party, the Court may extend, even retrospectively, a time period referred to in the RoP or imposed by the Court. The deadline for filing the Statement of grounds of appeal is extendable as it is not one of the deadlines specified under R. 9.4 RoP for which an extension is excluded. 5. Taking into consideration the two days oral hearing that one the lead attorney has to attend at the EPO at the time the deadline for filing the Statement of grounds of appeal expires, and considering that a time extension for filing said grounds of appeal would not prevent the enforcement of the impugned order, it is justified, by reference to the principles of due process, that the Appellants may exceptionally be granted a time extension which shall be limited to three working days. 2 6. Given the approaching deadline for filing the grounds of appeal, and considering that the Court has taken into account the interests of both parties, including the interest and the position of the Respondents which remains sufficiently secured since the impugned order is enforceable, there is no need to hear the Respondents on this request for time extension. PROCEDURAL ORDER The deadline for the Appellants to file their Statement of Grounds of appeal, currently expiring on 26 September 2025, is extended by three (3) working days until 1 October 2025. This order was issued on 24 September 2025 EMMANUEL, Signé numériquement par EMMANUEL, LUCIEN, LUCIEN, RENÉ RENÉ GOUGÉ Date : 2025.09.24 08:57:38 GOUGÉ +02'00' Emmanuel Gougé, Judge-rapporteur 3
Key Holdings
- Short extension (3 days) granted for filing grounds of appeal.
- Reason: professional constraints/EPO hearing.
- Commentary critical of granting extensions for foreseeable scheduling conflicts.
Tags
- Added Matter
- Appeal
- Time Limits