Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine v Healios K.K (CFI, 22 August 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 22 August 2024 (UPC_CFI_75/2023, ACT_464985/2023, ORD_591107/2023), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Central Division (A. Kupecz) granted the firm Mathys & Squire access to the pleadings and evidence in the revocation action on EP 3 056 563 brought by Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine against Healios, Riken and Osaka University, after redaction of personal data and of the confidential passages identified by Astellas. The order confirms that once proceedings have ended in settlement, a general interest is enough to obtain access.

Question

May a third party showing only a general interest obtain access to the pleadings and evidence of proceedings ended by settlement, and may the claimant obtain redaction of sensitive information?

Decision

The judge had awaited the Court of Appeal decision of 10 April 2024 on public access before ruling. As the proceedings ended on 23 July 2024 on the parties’ joint application, the applicant’s general interest suffices and Astellas’s objection that there was no direct interest fails: once the case has ended in settlement, the balance of interests will normally favour access. No abuse, public order ground or third-party interest stands in the way. Astellas’s interest is protected by redaction, justified by the commercial risk and by the fact that the applicant may act for competitors, of information on its product timeline in its reply of 29 November 2023 and in the rejoinder of 29 December 2023 (Rule 262.2 RoP). Personal data is redacted under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Leave to appeal is granted and access is deferred for 16 days after service.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: settlement does not shield the file from the public, a party wishing to protect information must seek precise, reasoned redactions.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts. 10, 45 and 73(2)(b)(ii)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 220.2, 224.1(b) and 262

Regulation (EU) 2016/679

protection of personal data

Case law cited

Ocado Innovation v Autostore, Court of Appeal, 10 April 2024, Ocado Innovation v Autostore, Nordic-Baltic Regional Division, 17 October 2023, The Hague Local Division, 29 July 2024 (UPC_CFI_131/2024)

Related decisions

• Mathys & Squire v Astellas, 28 December 2023, earlier order on the same access request.

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.