UPC_CoA_899/2025

Decisions and documents (1)

• 2026-03-30procedural

  Appellants:

  A. Menarini Diagnostics s.r.l.; Sinocare Inc.

  Respondent:

  Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.

  1. By not contesting the jurisdiction and competence of the Court in First Instance, the Appellant (Defendant in first instance) has in principle foregone this opportunity on appeal and cannot raise the alleged lack of jurisdiction and competence as a ground for overturning the impugned order (Art. 26(1) Brussels I Recast and R. 19.7 RoP). 2. By manufacturing, preparing and selling allegedly infringing products intended for the Contracting Member States of the UPC, there is a likelihood of damage occurring in the UPC territory arising from the possibility of third parties obtaining these products in the Contracting Member States, even if the acts causing the damage are performed by the Defendant outside the Contracting Member States. This provides basis for jurisdiction of the UPC pursuant to Art. 71b(2) in conjunction with Art. 7(2) Brussels I Recast. 3. Appellants must demonstrate that any alleged procedural or substantive errors by the Court of First Instance, such as those in relation to the procedural schedule applied in first instance, have resulted in an incorrect decision by the Court of First Instance. In the absence of such a showing, the alleged errors cannot result in setting aside the impugned order.

  Judge: Ulrike Voß • Panel: Dorothea Hofer, Gérard Myon, Nathalie Sabotier, Ulrike Voß🔒 Unlock Official PDF