NJOY Netherlands v VMR Products (CFI, 22 January 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 22 January 2024 (UPC_CFI_308/2023, App_159/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Central Division declared that VMR Products’ defence to revocation was served on NJOY on 13 December 2023, the date on which the Registry sent the corrected version. The order is mainly of interest for its reservation of principle: it is not for the judge-rapporteur to tell the parties when their time limits start, and he did so here only by way of exception.

Question

The defence lodged on 27 November 2023 had been found incomplete by the Registry. A corrected version, lodged on 11 December, was sent to the claimant on 13 December 2023 after the formal check. NJOY asked the judge to declare the date of service, on which the time limit for its reply depends.

Decision

Rule 9 RoP allows active case management, but neither it nor any other rule permits the judge-rapporteur to tell a party the exact expiry of a time limit: such an advisory role would conflict with judicial impartiality and the right to a fair trial, and the view expressed would bind neither the panel nor the Court of Appeal (paragraphs 8 to 12). By way of exception, to prevent procedural disputes, the judge identified the date (paragraph 13). Only the corrected version had to be sent (paragraphs 14 and 15), and electronic service is deemed effected on the day the message is sent, namely 13 December 2023 (Rules 271.6(a) and 278.4) (paragraphs 16 and 17).

Key points for practice

• Where the Registry has a pleading corrected, the time limit for a response runs from the sending of the corrected version.
• Computing time limits is the parties’ task: a request to declare the date of service will be granted only exceptionally.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 17

Rules of Procedure

Rules 9, 27, 54, 271.6(a), 278.4 and 333

Other provisions

European Convention on Human Rights, Art. 6, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47

Case law cited

None.

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.