Opens in a new tab

Chint New Energy Technology v JingAo Solar (CFI, 19 March 2025)

Date19 March 2025
CourtCFI
DivisionMunich (DE) Local Division
Type of actionGeneric application
Registry referenceApp_54919/2024 · ORD_55185/2024
PartiesChint Solar Netherlands B.V. , Astronergy Europe GmbH , Astronergy Solarmodule GmbH , Chint New Energy Technology Co., Ltd., Astronergy Gmb…

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

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

By order of 19 March 2025 (UPC_CFI_425/2024, App_54919/2024), Judge-rapporteur Pichlmaier of the Munich Local Division ordered JingAo Solar, claimant in the infringement action on EP 2 787 541, to provide by 30 April 2025 security for costs of EUR 200,000 in favour of Chint New Energy Technology and the five other defendants, by a bank guarantee on first demand or by deposit into the UPC’s account. Failing that, a decision by default may be given (Rule 355).

Question

Does the claimant’s seat in China justify an order for security for costs?

Decision

A seat outside the EU and the EEA cannot in itself be decisive, as that would amount to a priori discrimination based on the nationality of the seat. Under the Court of Appeal’s case law (UPC_CoA_217/2024), there must be a legitimate and real concern that a costs order may not be enforceable, or only in an unduly burdensome way. Although China has ratified the Hague Service Convention, service requests are often not forwarded or are returned, as has happened before the UPC itself (UPC_CFI_332/2024, UPC_CFI_508/2023 and UPC_CFI_509/2023). For a state that fails to meet its Convention obligations, it must be assumed that a UPC costs order would be unenforceable or enforceable only with undue difficulty. The amount reflects the costs recoverable for a value in dispute of up to EUR 2 million.

Key points for practice

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
Arts 69(4) and 73
Rules of Procedure
Rules 158, 220.2 and 355
Other provisions
Hague Service Convention
Case law cited
Court of Appeal, UPC_CoA_217/2024, Mannheim Local Division, UPC_CFI_332/2024, UPC_CFI_508/2023 and UPC_CFI_509/2023

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.


Going further

Lexicon: Written procedure (UPC), Court fees and costs (UPC).

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

No case number recorded in this record.

Parties

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

Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals

No other decision in the corpus bears the same case number, and no appeal is documented in the corpus to date.

What the record states

Nature of the act
Generic application
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
JingAo Solar doit fournir une garantie pour frais de 200 000 euros avant le 30 avril 2025, l'exécution en Chine d'une décision de la JUB sur les frais étant présumée impossible ou excessivement difficile.
Appeal
No appeal documented in the corpus, this does not mean that no appeal was lodged.
Instance
First-instance decision, whether it has become final is not recorded.

Patents mentioned

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.

Patents and standards

PublicationRole in the disputeFamilyStandard and declarationPoolSources
EP 2 787 541Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified)
Also mentioned in 4 other decision(s): JingAo Solar v Chint New Energy (CFI, 28 November 2025) · Chint New Energy v JingAo Solar (CoA, 9 July 2025) · Chint New Energy v JingAo Solar (CoA, 20 May 2025) · JingAo Solar v Chint New Energy Technology (CFI, 31 March 2025)
not recordednot recordednot recordedEspacenet
links not checked
mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis
The statuses “asserted in litigation”, “declared essential”, “listed by a pool” and “essentiality examined by a court” are distinct and may coexist. Validity, infringement and technical essentiality are different questions. Scope: patents cited in the decisions of the Dhenne Avocats corpus, with no essentiality score or prediction.

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.