Opens in a new tab

Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump v Grundfos (CoA, 19 December 2025)

Date19 December 2025
CourtCoA
DivisionLuxembourg (LU)
Type of actionApplication For Costs
Case number(s)UPC_CoA_622/2025;UPC_CoA_623/2025
Registry referenceUPC_CoA_622/2025 · UPC_CoA_623/2025
PartiesHefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump Co., Ltd v. Grundfos Holding A/S

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

Case timeline

Dhenne Avocats represents claimants and defendants in European patent disputes before the Unified Patent Court, including the Paris divisions.

Contact the firm

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

In an order of 19 December 2025, made in the joined appeals UPC_CoA_622/2025 and UPC_CoA_623/2025, the Court of Appeal ordered Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump, an appellant based in China, to provide security of EUR 75,000 per appeal in favour of Grundfos Holding, the respondent and claimant at first instance. Security under Article 69(4) UPCA falls only on the party that brings the proceedings, on appeal the appellant.

Question

May the respondent, who was the claimant at first instance, obtain security for the appeal costs from the appellant, and is the appellant’s seat in China sufficient ground?

Decision

The application was admissible: on appeal the appellant brings the proceedings, and only the respondent may seek security, even if it was the claimant below (paragraphs 7 to 13), an exception is reserved for a defendant-respondent rightly alleging an evident error in the decision under appeal, which was not the case (paragraph 14). Hefei’s seat in China supports the conclusion that a costs decision would probably be unenforceable or enforceable only with disproportionate effort, given the lack of any guarantee of recognition outside the EU and EEA (paragraphs 16 to 18). The absence of a request at first instance and Hefei’s solvency were irrelevant (paragraphs 19 to 22). The undisputed amount of EUR 150,000 was split into EUR 75,000 per appeal, to be provided within four weeks (paragraphs 23 and 24).

Key points for practice

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
Art. 69(4)
Rules of Procedure
Rules 158.1, 158.5 and 355
Case law cited
AorticLab v Emboline, 20 June 2025, Oerlikon Textile v Bhagat Textile Engineers, 30 October 2025, Volkswagen v Network System, 17 September 2024, Aarke v SodaStream Industries, 29 November 2024, Chint New Energy v JingAo Solar, 9 July 2025

Related decisions

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 10 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.


Decisions in the same proceedings

Going further

Lexicon: UPC Court of Appeal, Court fees and costs (UPC).

Dhenne Avocats blog: UPC Appeals: What the Numbers Show.

Source and translations

Official source
Unified Patent Court registry link recorded in the record
Original language
not recorded
Translation available
no translation recorded the firm’s French record is a summary, not a translation
Date checked
not recorded
Only the official text is authoritative. A machine translation is never presented as official, republishing a third-party document requires a verified basis in rights, and a link to the source is preferred.

Follow this case

Proceedings, related decisions, appeals, parties and patents as recorded in the registry and in the Dhenne Avocats corpus. Each link states its source.

Proceedings

  • UPC_CoA_622/2025 official number
  • UPC_CoA_623/2025 official number

Follow these proceedings

Parties

Exact name as it appears in the record, group affiliation only where sourced and dated.

Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals

  1. 19 December 2025 Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump v Grundfos (CoA, 19 December 2025) Application For Costs · UPC_CoA_623/2025, UPC_CoA_622/2025
  2. 27 May 2026 Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump v Grundfos (CoA, UPC_CoA_623/2025, 27 May 2026) Appeal RoP220.2 · UPC_CoA_623/2025
  3. 27 May 2026 Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump v Grundfos (CoA, UPC_CoA_622/2025, 27 May 2026) Appeal RoP220.1 · UPC_CoA_622/2025

    La cour d'appel infirme la décision de Düsseldorf : le brevet EP 2 778 423 est annulé pour les revendications 1 à 3, 5 et 11, faute d'activité inventive au regard de D5, et l'action en contrefaçon de Grundfos est rejetée.

What the record states

Nature of the act
Application For Costs
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
La cour d'appel ordonne à l'appelante établie en Chine de constituer une garantie de 75 000 euros par appel, l'intimé pouvant la demander même s'il était demandeur en première instance.
Appeal
Decision of the Court of Appeal.
Instance
Court of Appeal decision.

Related decisions cited in the analyses

Scope: Dhenne Avocats corpus. Registry-based links are marked “official number”; links derived from the analyses are marked as such. An erroneous link can be withdrawn without deleting any record.

Receive an alert

Weekly summary of new records and substantive updates matching what you follow. Address confirmed by email, unsubscribe at any time, one email per week even where several of your follows match.

Follow

Weekly summary, on Fridays.