SWARCO FUTURIT v Yunex (CFI, 12 October 2026)

Dhenne Avocats · 17 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 12 October 2026, the Munich Local Division, sitting with a technically qualified judge, rejected as out of time a request for review under Rule 333 RoP against point 6 of its order of 15 September 2026. The dispute between SWARCO FUTURIT Verkehrssignalsysteme and Yunex concerns EP 2 643 717 and comprises the infringement action UPC_CFI_245/2025 and the counterclaim for revocation UPC_CFI_618/2025, with Shenzhen Dianming Technology intervening in support of the defendant.

Question

Do a breakdown in internal communication within the firm and the attorneys’ workload justify a retroactive extension of the 15-day time limit under Rule 333.2 RoP?

Decision

The Local Division rejected the request for a retroactive extension and then the request for review itself, which was out of time under the 15-day limit of Rule 333.2 RoP, the fee having been paid only on 1 October 2026. It dismissed the grounds relied on, namely a failure of internal communication within the firm and the workload, and did not allow an appeal.

Key points for practice

• A request for review is only validly made if the fee is paid within the 15-day limit of Rule 333.2 RoP, and late payment is enough to deprive it of effect.
• Organisational failings within the firm, whether a missed internal handover or an excessive workload, do not justify a retroactive extension.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 333 and 333.2 RoP

Related decisions

• SWARCO FUTURIT v Yunex, 28 September 2026, an earlier decision in the same case.
• SWARCO FUTURIT v Yunex, 19 February 2025, an earlier decision between the same parties.

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 17 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.