Main Details: Registry number APL_588420/2023 Date 3 April, 2024 Parties Juul Labs, Inc. v. NJOY Netherlands B.V. Order/Decision reference ORD_598223/2023 Type of action Appeal RoP220.2 Language of Proceedings English Court - Division Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) English Headnotes: 1. If the claimant has not correctly named the defendant in the statement initiating the proceedings, the Court may allow the claimant to rectify the error. The request can be granted if the defendant is not unreasonably prejudiced by the incorrect statement of name and its rectification. As a rule, there will be no unreasonable prejudice if, despite the incorrect statement of name, it must have been clear to the defendant and to the Court, based on the circumstances of the case, that the claimant intended the statement for revocation to be directed against the defendant. 2. Rule 242.1 RoP is to be interpreted to mean that if the decision of the Court of Appeal is not a final order or decision concluding an action, the Court of Appeal, in the case at hand, will not issue an order for costs in respect of the proceedings at first instance and at appeal. However, the outcome of the appeal must be considered when, in the final decision on the action at hand, the Court determines whether and to what extent a party must bear the costs of the other party because it was unsuccessful within the meaning of Article 69 UPCA. English Keywords: Order for costs in the decision of the Court of Appeal, Rectification of the name of a party Back to Decisions and Orders
Main Details: Registry number APL_588420/2023 Date 3 April, 2024 Parties Juul Labs, Inc. v. NJOY Netherlands B.V. Order/Decision reference ORD_598223/2023 Type of action Appeal RoP220.2 Language of Proceedings English Court - Division Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) English Headnotes: 1. If the claimant has not correctly named the defendant in the statement initiating the proceedings, the Court may allow the claimant to rectify the error. The request can be granted if the defendant is not unreasonably prejudiced by the incorrect statement of name and its rectification. As a rule, there will be no unreasonable prejudice if, despite the incorrect statement of name, it must have been clear to the defendant and to the Court, based on the circumstances of the case, that the claimant intended the statement for revocation to be directed against the defendant. 2. Rule 242.1 RoP is to be interpreted to mean that if the decision of the Court of Appeal is not a final order or decision concluding an action, the Court of Appeal, in the case at hand, will not issue an order for costs in respect of the proceedings at first instance and at appeal. However, the outcome of the appeal must be considered when, in the final decision on the action at hand, the Court determines whether and to what extent a party must bear the costs of the other party because it was unsuccessful within the meaning of Article 69 UPCA. English Keywords: Order for costs in the decision of the Court of Appeal, Rectification of the name of a party Back to Decisions and Orders