myStromer v Revolt Zycling (CFI, 30 June 2023)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 30 June 2023 (UPC_CFI_177/2023, APP_541204/2023), the Düsseldorf Local Division rejected myStromer’s application under Rule 353 RoP to rectify the provisional measures order of 22 June 2023 against Revolt Zycling, based on EP 2 546 134, so as to extend the injunction to Austria. The order draws the line between correcting a clerical error and changing the scope of a decision.

Question

Is the omission of Austria, where the patent is also in force, from an injunction limited to Germany, the Netherlands, France and Italy an obvious inaccuracy that can be rectified under Rule 353 RoP?

Decision

The application is admissible, and rectification, which involves purely formal corrections without any review of the merits, need not be decided by the same panel. But there was no obvious discrepancy between the decision actually taken and its wording: the injunction mirrored the auxiliary request, which named only four states. Even if Austria had been left out of the list by oversight, the applicant’s infringement arguments addressed only those four states, which allows no other conclusion. Reliance on Art. 34 UPCA raises a question about the scope of the order, which cannot amount to an obvious inaccuracy.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: the list of states covered by an application for provisional measures should be checked before filing, an omission in the requests cannot be cured through Rule 353 RoP.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 34 (relied on by the applicant)

Rules of Procedure

Rule 353

Related decisions

• myStromer AG v Revolt Zycling AG, 22 June 2023, provisional measures order whose rectification was sought.

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.