Skip to main content

Order

page banner image

Main Details:

Case number
UPC_CoA_563/2024
Registry number
APL_53716/2024
Date
Parties
Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy
v.
Microsoft Corporation
Order/Decision reference
ORD_68946/2024
Type of action
Appeal RoP220.2
Language of Proceedings
English
Court - Division
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU)

Headnotes:

• No corporate representative of a legal person or any other natural person who has extensive administrative and financial powers within the legal person, whether as a result of holding a high-level management or administrative position or holding a significant amount of shares in the legal person, may serve as a representative of that legal person, regardless of whether said corporate representative of the legal person or natural person is qualified to act as a UPC representative in accordance with Art. 48(1) or (2) UPCA. • One of the objectives of parties being represented by a lawyer is, among other things, to ensure that legal persons are defended by a representative who is sufficiently distant from the legal person which he or she represents. • The independent exercise of the duties of a representative is not undermined by the mere fact that the lawyer or the European patent attorney, qualified as a representative under Art. 48(1) or (2) UPCA, is employed by the party he or she represents. • A representative who is employed by a party must act towards the Court as an independent counsellor by serving the interests of his or her client in an unbiased manner without regard to his or her personal feelings or interests, pursuant to Art. 2.4.1 of the Code of Conduct for Representatives who appear before the Court according to R. 290.2 RoP.

Keywords:

Representation of parties in proceedings before the UPC, Art. 48 UPCA