Main Details: Case number App_67917/2024 Registry number ACT_45469/2024 Date 7 April, 2025 Parties Dainese S.p.A. v S.L.Alpinestars S.p.A., Alpinestars Research S.p.A., Motocard Bike S.l. Order/Decision reference ORD_69176/2024 Type of action Infringement Action Language of Proceedings English Court - Division Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Local Division Headnotes: Rule 263, para. 3, RoP applies both in cases where a) the claimant limits the relief sought (petitum), for example by reducing the relief sought (e.g. injunction or damages); and b) the claimant limits the cause of action (causa petendi), for example after starting the proceedings to protect a plurality of patents, then it renounces one of them. Differently from rule 265 RoP, rule 263 RoP does not provide the regulation of the proceeding costs, because the proceedings continue against the defendant in relation to other claims. This solution doesn’t go against the "losing party bears the costs" principle, established by Article 69 UPCA: indeed, the unconditional limitation requested by the claimant will be considered by the Court regulating the costs decision. Keywords: rule 263 RoP, rule 265 RoP Back to Decisions and Orders
Main Details: Case number App_67917/2024 Registry number ACT_45469/2024 Date 7 April, 2025 Parties Dainese S.p.A. v S.L.Alpinestars S.p.A., Alpinestars Research S.p.A., Motocard Bike S.l. Order/Decision reference ORD_69176/2024 Type of action Infringement Action Language of Proceedings English Court - Division Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Local Division Headnotes: Rule 263, para. 3, RoP applies both in cases where a) the claimant limits the relief sought (petitum), for example by reducing the relief sought (e.g. injunction or damages); and b) the claimant limits the cause of action (causa petendi), for example after starting the proceedings to protect a plurality of patents, then it renounces one of them. Differently from rule 265 RoP, rule 263 RoP does not provide the regulation of the proceeding costs, because the proceedings continue against the defendant in relation to other claims. This solution doesn’t go against the "losing party bears the costs" principle, established by Article 69 UPCA: indeed, the unconditional limitation requested by the claimant will be considered by the Court regulating the costs decision. Keywords: rule 263 RoP, rule 265 RoP Back to Decisions and Orders