Meril GmbH and Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd. v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation, Order of the Court of Appeal of the UPC, 4 October 2024, Case no. APL_83/2024 UPC_CoA_2/2024
HEADNOTE
1. Which party is the successful party within the meaning of Art. 69(1) UPCA in the context of a disposal of an action following a cease-and-desist undertaking by the defendant must be determined on the basis of the specific characteristics of the case and in particular the requests of the parties and the content of the undertaking. If, after the commencement of the proceedings, the defendant undertakes to comply with the claimant’s requests, it is generally not necessary to examine the admissibility and the merits of the case at the point of time of the undertaking in order to determine which party is the successful party. The undertaking itself implies that the claimant’s requests have been fulfilled. This means that, as a general rule, the claimant must be considered the successful party.
A copy of the order can be read here.
