Docket Navigator (applicant) in Sumi Agro v Syngenta (CoA, 19 December 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

The judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal, sitting alone, rejects the request of Docket Navigator, which runs a patent litigation tracking platform, for access to the written pleadings and evidence in appeal UPC_CoA_523/2024 between Sumi Agro Limited and Sumi Agro Europe Limited and Syngenta Limited (EP 2 152 073). Presented as a test case, the request aimed to make those documents available to the platform’s paying subscribers. The order closes Rule 262.1(b) RoP to database publishers seeking to redistribute case files, while holding that copyright is not a ground for refusing access.

Question

May a commercial publisher obtain access to the pleadings and evidence in proceedings in order to make them available to its subscribers, and must copyright in those documents be weighed in the balance?

Decision

Copyright is not among the interests to be protected under Art. 45 UPCA when deciding on a request for access. Rights holders have national infringement proceedings available to them (paragraphs 17 to 22). A reasoned request must identify the documents, their purpose and why access is needed, and the requester must be represented (paragraphs 24 to 26). The control the Court exercises over each reasoned request made through a representative would be lost if a publisher could give access to its subscribers. That interest is not protected under Art. 45 UPCA, and no condition can cure the defect (paragraphs 23, 27 and 28). No costs are awarded, as Art. 69(3) UPCA applies only in exceptional circumstances not present here (paragraph 30).

Key points for practice

• Access under Rule 262.1(b) RoP is assessed request by request, in light of the requester’s identity and purpose. Commercial redistribution is not a legitimate interest (paragraphs 25 to 28).
• Parties cannot rely on copyright in their pleadings or exhibits to resist public access (paragraphs 17 and 22).

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 10(1), 45 and 69(3)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 245, 262.1 and 262.2

Other provisions

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 17(2) and 42, TFEU, Art. 15(3), Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, Directive 2001/29/EC, Art. 9, Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents (CETS No. 205).

Case law cited

Ocado, Court of Appeal, 8 February 2024, UPC_CoA_404/2023, Ocado, Court of Appeal, 10 April 2024, UPC_CoA_404/2023, Meril, Court of Appeal, 5 May 2025, UPC_CoA_635/2024, CJEU, 29 July 2019, Funke Medien NRW, C-469/17, CJEU, 28 October 2020, BY, C-637/19.

Related decisions

• Sumi Agro v Syngenta, 23 December 2025, withdrawal of the application for rehearing pending before the Court of Appeal.

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.