In this AI-powered breakdown of Week 36, 2025, our digital hosts unpack Professor Willem Hoyng's expert analysis on the decisions shaping UPC practice.Key topics covered in this episode include:Late Arguments (Court of Appeal): A look at a Court of Appeal decision confirming the high bar for discretionary reviews and why invalidity grounds that could have been raised earlier with "reasonable diligence" will be rejected. (CeraCon v Sunstar)Security for Costs: Analysis of a Mannheim Local Division order requiring €100,000 in security due to the difficulty of enforcing a judgment in China, even when the claimant has assets in the EU. (Huawei v MediaTek)Preliminary Injunctions: How the Düsseldorf Local Division handles PI requests when a defendant defaults, conducting its own full assessment of the merits but refusing to grant an injunction against a party that has not yet been served. (HP v Zhuhai & Rentmeister)Stays for EPO Oppositions: A clear ruling from the Mannheim Local Division refusing to stay proceedings pending EPO opposition, confirming the UPC's commitment to its own speedy timeline. (Centripetal v Keysight)For a deeper dive, read Professor Hoyng's full written commentary for Week 36:https://www.hoyngrokhmonegier.com/news-insights/upc-unfiltered-by-willem-hoyng-upc-decisions-week-36-2025/Disclaimer: This podcast uses AI-generated voices—minor inaccuracies may occur.

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related