Polytechnik Luft- und Feuerungstechnik GmbH v. Dall Energy ApS, UPC Court of Appeal, 24 April 2026, Case number UPC-COA-0000057/2026
In the ongoing proceedings brought by Dall against Polytechnik before the Copenhagen LD, Polytechnik had been ordered to produce documentary evidence containing technical information on its allegedly infringing furnaces and to provide that information to Dall’s legal representatives. Polytechnik filed an appeal against the order for evidence production and applied for suspension of its effect, as they argued that immediate enforcement would cause irreparable harm by exposing key technical know-how to a competitor’s patent advisers.
The UPC Court of Appeal (CA) noted that in order for proceedings to progress in a timely manner, suspensive effect should only be granted under exceptional circumstances, especially in relation to procedural orders.
The CA also held that the confidentiality club provisions in the first-instance order were sufficient to protect the technical information from being used for purposes unrelated to the proceedings, and that the legal team would be prevented from sharing the confidential information therein with the senior decision makers at Dall. Polytechnik had not made specific objections to the number of individuals admitted to the confidentiality club and as such the first-instance decision could not be disproportionate.
The CA therefore found that the threshold to grant suspensive effect pending the appeal was not met and rejected Polytechnik’s application.
A copy of the Order can be found here.
