Case Law
Rule 43: Exchange of written pleadings (revocation action)

Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Central Division, Order dated 24/01/2024, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH / Amgen, Inc. (Case number UPC_CFI_1/2023, ORD_2233/2024)
Example of decision on the limits of the request to exchange further written pleadings in the written procedure: “In the written procedure the judge-rapporteur may, on a reasoned request by a party, allow the exchange of further written pleadings (Rule 58 in connection with Rule 36 RoP). In addition, under Rule 9.1 RoP, the Court may at any stage of the proceedings, therefore also during the written procedure after the exchange of the pleadings in accordance with Rule 43 RoP, order a party to take any step, answer any question or provide any clarification or evidence. As pointed out by the Defendant, pursuant to Rules 103 and 104 RoP, the judge-rapporteur may order the production of further pleadings and evidence in the interim procedure. However, it does not follow from the fact that the judge-rapporteur may do so also in the interim procedure, that the present request (which was made before closure of the written procedure), is as such premature and should for that reason be rejected.
Even though in principle the RoP do not preclude the request made by the Claimants, this does not mean that there is an automatic right to reply to a Rejoinder, as also acknowledged by the Claimants. To the contrary, from the system of exchange of written pleadings in the written procedure against the background of the generally front-loaded character of UPC proceedings (e.g. Preamble RoP 7), it follows that the exchange of the written pleadings is normally limited in accordance with Rule 43 RoP (cf. Rule 58 in connection with Rule 35 RoP). Accordingly, it is to the discretion of the Court to assess whether the present request justifies departing from the general, fixed framework of written submissions which is designed to conduct UPC proceedings in an efficient, proportionate, fair and equitable way (Preamble RoP 2 and 4).”