Hanshow Technology v VusionGroup (CoA, 6 June 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

The Court of Appeal upheld the Munich Local Division’s refusal to extend retroactively the one-month period under Rule 151 within which Hanshow had to apply for the costs of the provisional measures proceedings it won against VusionGroup (EP 3 883 277). That period cannot be extended under Rule 9.3(a): a failure to meet it can be cured only by re-establishment of rights under Rule 320. The rule matters to any defendant who defeats a provisional measures application.

Question

Where no action on the merits is pending, when does the Rule 151 period start, and may it be extended after expiry under Rule 9.3(a)?

Decision

Absent merits proceedings, Rules 150 and 151 apply mutatis mutandis and the month runs from service of the decision on provisional measures. The same applies on appeal (paragraphs 42 to 44). Here it expired on 13 June 2024, the application was filed on 18 June.

The wording of Rule 9.3(a) does not exclude an extension and Rule 151 is not listed in Rule 9.4, but Rule 9 concerns pending proceedings. Rule 151 is a preclusive time limit, comparable to Rules 213.1, 224.1 or 320.2, which protects the other party’s legal certainty. Only re-establishment under Rule 320 is available (paragraphs 45 to 51). VusionGroup’s request for the costs of the appeal was also rejected (paragraphs 54 to 56).

Key points for practice

• A defendant who defeats a provisional measures application must apply for costs within one month of service of the decision closing those proceedings, without waiting for any merits action (paragraphs 42 to 44).
• Once the period is missed, only re-establishment of rights remains, within the limits of Rule 320.2 (paragraphs 49 to 51).

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 69

Rules of Procedure

Rules 9.3, 9.4, 150, 151 and 320

Case law cited

SharkNinja, Court of Appeal, 20 January 2025, Sumi Agro v Syngenta, Court of Appeal, 3 March 2025

Related decisions

• SES-imagotag v Hanshow, 20 December 2023, dismissal of the application for provisional measures.
• SES-imagotag v Hanshow, 13 May 2024, Court of Appeal dismissing the appeal in the provisional measures proceedings.
• Hanshow, 29 July 2024, referral of the costs application to the first instance.
• Hanshow, 18 October 2024, contested order of the Munich Local Division.

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.