Oerlikon Textile v Himson Engineering (CFI, ORD_28787/2024, 23 July 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 23 July 2024 (UPC_CFI_240/2023, ACT_549550/2023, ORD_40568/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Milan Local Division (A. Zana) ruled on the confidentiality application made by Oerlikon Textile, claimant in the infringement action on EP 2 145 848 against Himson Engineering. Document 37, a settlement agreement with a third party withdrawn by Oerlikon, is excluded from the proceedings. The redacted commercial data in document 38 are confidential, but access is granted to Himson’s counsel, one technical adviser and one natural person representing the defendant.

Question

Can the Rule 262A RoP confidentiality club exclude every natural person of the opposing party?

Decision

Rule 262A.6 RoP limits the number of persons to what a fair trial requires but requires at least one natural person for each party. Exclusion is possible only by agreement, by waiver or on competition law grounds, none of which applied (paragraphs 3.2 and 4.4). Faced with that choice, Oerlikon withdrew document 37: it is excluded from the proceedings and Himson’s counsel, who has seen it, must keep it secret, including in any other proceedings (paragraph 3.3). For document 38, a single technical adviser is admitted given the small number of data points (paragraph 4.5). Any breach may lead to a penalty under Rule 354.3 RoP. Leave to appeal is granted and the order takes effect only on 4 September 2024, so that an appeal with suspensive effect can be sought (paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2).

Key points for practice

• Practical point: a party filing a sensitive document must accept access by at least one natural person of its opponent or give up the exhibit, withdrawal does not lift the secrecy obligation of counsel who has read it.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts. 58 and 74

Rules of Procedure

Rules 158, 223, 262A and 354.3, Preamble (points 2 and 8)

Other provisions

Directive (EU) 2016/943, Art. 9(2)

Case law cited

Düsseldorf Local Division, UPC_CFI_355/2023, Mannheim Local Division, 14 February 2024, UPC_CFI_210/2023, The Hague Local Division, UPC_CFI_239/2023, App. 589842/2023

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.