Valeo Electrification v. Magna International France, SARL, Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG, Magna PT s.r.o., Order of the CFI of the UPC, Düsseldorf Local Division, 20 November 2024, Case nos. UPC_CFI_368/2024 and UPC_CFI_347/2024
The UPC Düsseldorf Local Division today dismissed Magna’s application for rectification. The court ruled that there is no ‘obvious slip’ in the PI Orders delivered on 31 October 2024 (the ‘604 order can be read here, see a previous post here).
“On 31 October 2024, the Düsseldorf Local Division delivered an Order requiring the Defendants to refrain from offering, placing on the market, or using or importing or storing the product for those purposes, certain electric motor generators and the replacement parts supplied for the spare parts business (challenged embodiment I) and the 7HDT400 gearbox as an assembly with one of the aforementioned electric motor generators (challenged embodiments II) in Germany and France. The Court made an exemption to that injunction by permitting the Defendants to fulfil their current obligations with regard to the challenged embodiments towards their customer BMW within the framework and the scope of existing delivery obligations (status: 8 October 2024) for five specified BMW models.
“In the view of the Defendants, there is an obvious slip in the list of BMW models in Section II of the Order. The clear and unambiguous intention of the Court was to ensure the full compliance with the Defendants´ current obligations with respect to BMW. In view of this, the model “2 Series Gran Coupé” must be added because, according to the Defendants, this model was also subject to supply obligations on 8 October 2024.”
However, the court rules that:
“The model “2 Series Gran Coupé” was not introduced into the proceedings by the Defendants before their application for rectification of 6 November 2024. This model was therefore not the subject of the written submissions prior to the oral hearing, nor of the oral hearing itself. It could therefore not be taken into account in the Order. Its absence from the Order is therefore neither an error nor an obvious slip that could give rise to a correction of the Order.”
