Avago Technologies International Sales v Tesla Germany (CFI, 27 January 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 27 January 2025, the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division (Judge Zigann) granted a patent attorney, acting on his own behalf, access to the file of the counterclaim for revocation (CC_581177/2023) lodged in the infringement action brought by Avago Technologies International Sales against Tesla Germany and Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg (UPC_CFI_52/2023, EP 1 838 002). The order, brief and unopposed, shows the division’s practice on public access to pleadings.

Question

May a third party relying on a professional or scientific interest, including training purposes, obtain access to the pleadings and evidence in a counterclaim for revocation?

Decision

The applicant relied on the Court of Appeal’s decision of 10 April 2024 (UPC_CoA_404/2023), which he read as accepting such an interest. As the parties did not object, provided access was confined to the counterclaim, and no redactions were sought, the judge granted access to the pleadings and exhibits filed in that workflow. Access does not extend to the infringement file or to other workflows. Any party may request a panel review (Rule 333), the order remaining effective meanwhile.

Key points for practice

• Where the parties do not object, access is granted within the limits they accept, here the counterclaim alone.
• Practical point: an access request that targets a specific workflow makes the parties’ agreement easier to obtain.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 102.2, 262.1(b) and 333

Case law cited

Ocado Innovation v Autostore, Court of Appeal, 10 April 2024

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.