UPC_CFI_1624/2025

Decisions and documents (2)

• 2026-01-13procedural

  Claimant:

  Heraeus Electronics GmbH & Co. KG

  Defendant:

  Vibrantz GmbH

  1) Where a cost ratio has been determined, both parties are required to lodge, within the time limit, an application for a decision on their respective costs, in accordance with Rule 151 of the Rules of Procedure. 2) Failure to comply with the time limit for an application for a cost decision pursuant to R. 151.1 of the Rules of Procedure can only be remedied by re-establishment of rights (R. 320 RoP) (UPC_CoA_618/2024). 3) In principle, due care within the meaning of Rule 320.1 of the Rules of Procedure includes knowledge of the legal system and the relevant decisions, in particular those of the Court of Appeal. A represented party must assume responsibility for any fault on the part of their UPC representative. 4) For that reason, inadequate knowledge of the law is generally not sufficient grounds for re-establishment of rights. Local Division Munich 5) However, in the specific circumstances of the case at hand, the Applicant cannot be accused of misjudging the legal situation, despite being represented by a lawyer.

  Judge: Dr. Matthias Zigann • Panel: Graham Ashley, Dr. Matthias Zigann🔒 Unlock Official PDF
• 2026-01-13procedural

  Klägerin:

  Heraeus Electronics GmbH & Co. KG

  Beklagte:

  Vibrantz GmbH

  Application For Costs. Document: 2026-01-13 UPC_CFI_114-2024 und 448_2024 - Wiedereinsetzung (002).pdf. Case page: https://www.unifiedpatentcourt.org/en/node/160259

  Judge: Dr. Matthias Zigann • Panel: Edger Brinkman, Graham Ashley, Dr. Matthias Zigann🔒 Unlock Official PDF