HAMBURG LOCAL DIVISION Law and Practice Contributed by: Lukas Wosnitza, Michael Schneider, Sönke Scheltz and Désirée Heintz, Eisenführ Speiser
4. Procedural Issues 4.1 Hearing Structure
amount of damages. It will also be interesting to see which law the UPC applies in cases such as these, where the damages arose before the UPC came into force, and the liability for damages was determined by a national court. 3.4 Technically Qualified Judges The following technical judges were involved in the decisions made to date: Hergen Kapels, Veronique Laure, Arwed Burrichter, Rudi Goedeweeck (twice), Giorgio Checcacci (twice), Steven Kitchen, Christian Keller and Jeroen Meewisse. Judges Klepsch and Schilling have expressed their strong appreciation for the valuable and highly competent contributions of the technical judges assigned to their cases. However, they emphasised that staffing decisions, including the appointment of technical judges, are made centrally in Paris and are therefore beyond the control of the LD HH. 3.5 Influence of Prior Local Practice on Substantive Legal Decisions In the decisions and case management orders available to date, no influence of previous local practices is apparent. A somewhat more gen - erous approach to the urgency requirement for interim injunctions previously practiced by the District Court ( Landgericht ) Hamburg could be argued, if anything, but the available case law of the LD HH under the UPC does not suggest a deviation in approach in this respect from other local divisions. 3.6 Court of Appeal Substantive Jurisprudence There is no applicable information in this juris - diction.
Typically, the presiding judge opens the hear - ing with an introduction to the case, which is accompanied by a preliminary assessment out - lining the key issues likely to determine the out - come. Following this, the parties are granted a short break – usually 15–20 minutes, and up to 30 minutes in more complex matters – to pre - pare their pleadings in response. In most cases, separate rooms can be made available to the parties for this purpose. The LD HH does not schedule a formal lunch break, as there is no cafeteria within the court building. Generally, the court does not impose strict time limits on oral pleadings. The LD HH places trust in counsel to focus on the core issues identified during the opening. That said, time limits may be introduced at the court’s dis - cretion if doing so is considered helpful for the efficient conduct of the proceedings. Hearings before the UPC tend to be longer and more intricate compared to hearings before the German courts, as they usually address both infringement and revocation actions. However, the judges at the LD HH note that the overall hearing duration does not significantly differ from PI proceedings before German Courts, where both issues are frequently addressed. 4.2 Key Procedural Issues Change of the Language of the Proceedings When deciding whether to switch the language of the proceedings to the language in which the patent was granted, the court must consider all relevant case-specific factors and the positions of the parties. If the balance of interests is even – as in the case of Tandem Diabetes Care Inc & VitalAire GmbH v Roche Diabetes Care GmbH
38
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook