Ballinno v Kinexon Sports & Media (CoA, 26 August 2024)
| Date | 26 August 2024 |
|---|---|
| Court | CoA |
| Division | Luxembourg (LU) |
| Type of action | Generic application |
| Registry reference | App_45255/2024 · ORD_45561/2024 |
| Parties | Kinexon Sports & Media GmbH, Kinexon GmbH, Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) |
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.
Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026
Our analysis
Summary
By order of 26 August 2024 (UPC_CoA_328/2024, APL_36389/2024, App_45255/2024), the Court of Appeal (Kalden, Simonsson, Rombach, Faget, Papa) ordered Ballinno, appellant against orders of the Hamburg Local Division dismissing its application for provisional measures on EP 1 944 067, to provide security of EUR 25,000 for the costs of Kinexon Sports & Media, Kinexon and UEFA. The order accepts a request for security made at the appeal stage.
Question
May a party ask the Court of Appeal for security for the costs of the appeal, where security had already been ordered at first instance?
Decision
Yes. Art. 69(4) UPCA, which also applies to provisional measures, is not confined to first instance (paragraphs 23 to 25). Rule 158 RoP allows a reasoned request at any time during proceedings, and its place in Part 1 of the Rules is not decisive (paragraphs 26 to 29). Under Rule 222.2(a) RoP, the request could not reasonably have been made before the division, which cannot know whether an appeal will follow, and the ceiling on recoverable costs applies per instance (paragraphs 30 to 34). Security does not impair access to justice (paragraph 35). As Ballinno did not explain its overall finances beyond a bank balance of EUR 101,907.64, a risk of non-recovery is established (paragraphs 36 to 38). Given the narrower scope of the appeal, security is set at EUR 25,000, to be provided within two weeks by deposit or bank guarantee, failing which a default decision may follow (paragraphs 40 to 42).
Key points for practice
- Practical point: a respondent may seek fresh security for the appeal, an appellant should be ready to document its overall financial position, as a bank statement alone is not enough.
Provisions applied
- Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
- Arts. 62, 69(4) and 73
- Rules of Procedure
- Rules 158, 220.2, 222.2 and 355
- Administrative Committee decision on the scale of ceilings
- Art. 1(3)
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: UPC Court of Appeal.
Dhenne Avocats blog: UPC Appeals: What the Numbers Show.
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
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
Parties
- claimantKinexon Sports & Media GmbH13 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
- claimantUnion des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA)8 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
- claimantKinexon GmbH8 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals
What the record states
- Nature of the act
- Generic application
- Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
- Ballinno doit fournir sous deux semaines une garantie de 25 000 euros pour les frais d'appel des sociétés Kinexon et de l'UEFA, une telle demande étant recevable devant la cour d'appel.
- Appeal
- Decision of the Court of Appeal.
- Instance
- Court of Appeal decision.
Patents mentioned
EP 1 944 067 B1mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent
Related decisions cited in the analyses
- Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing v Microsoft (CoA, 24 February 2026) cites this decision
- Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Katun Germany (CFI, 11 February 2026) cites this decision
- Oerlikon Textile v Bhagat Textile Engineers (CoA, 30 October 2025) cites this decision
- BF exaQC v NVIDIA (CFI, 28 October 2025) cites this decision
- Huawei Technologies v MediaTek (CFI, 4 September 2025) cites this decision
- Huawei Technologies v MediaTek (CFI, 26 August 2025) cites this decision
- Ballinno v Kinexon Sports & Media (CoA, 12 May 2025) cites this decision
- City Glass and Glazing v Maars Holding (CFI, 19 November 2024) cites this decision
- Kinexon Sports & Media v Ballinno (CFI, 14 October 2024) cites this decision
- SodaStream Industries v Aarke (CFI, 6 September 2024) cites this decision
- Ballinno v Kinexon (CoA, 26 June 2025) cites this decision
- Kinexon Sports & Media v Ballinno (CFI, 21 August 2024) cites this decision
Patents and standards
| Publication | Role in the dispute | Family | Standard and declaration | Pool | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EP 1 944 067 B1Method and system for detecting an offside situation recorded proprietor: INVIT BV (changement de titulaire en 2024 vers BALLINNO B.V. selon les événements juridiques affichés) | Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 12 other decision(s): Kinexon Sports & Media v Ballinno (CFI, 21 May 2025) · Kinexon Sports & Media v Ballinno (CFI, 21 August 2025) · Ballinno v Kinexon Sports & Media (CoA, 15 August 2025) · Kinexon Sports & Media v Ballinno (CFI, 16 July 2025) · Ballinno v Kinexon (CoA, 26 June 2025) · Ballinno v Kinexon Sports & Media (CoA, 12 May 2025) · Kinexon Sports & Media v Ballinno (CFI, 14 October 2024) · Ballinno v UEFA (CFI, 17 September 2024) | not recorded | not recorded | not recorded | Espacenet · European Patent Register existence and title of the publication checked on 30 October 2026 (Google Patents, Espacenet and Register links are not checked automatically) mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis |
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.