Magna PT v Valeo Electrification (CoA, 21 November 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

In an order of 21 November 2024 (UPC_CoA_719/2024, App_62076/2024), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal suspended, until the competent panel rules on the application for suspensive effect, the provisional measures order made on 31 October 2024 by the Düsseldorf Local Division in favour of Valeo Electrification against Magna (EP 3 320 602), but only insofar as the exemption granted for certain supplies did not cover the BMW 2 Series Gran Coupé. The order, briefly reasoned, shows that the Court may freeze enforcement of a narrow part of an injunction while the application is examined.

Question

Pending the panel’s decision on suspensive effect, should the injunction be suspended insofar as it does not exempt a model omitted from the list of permitted supplies?

Decision

On 20 November 2024 the Local Division had dismissed Magna’s application for rectification, finding no obvious slip since that model had not been introduced in the proceedings (paragraph 5). The standing judge considered that Magna’s interest in preserving the status quo exceptionally outweighed Valeo’s interest in immediate enforcement until the panel decides (paragraph 9). Valeo may comment within ten calendar days, and the application was otherwise passed to the panel (paragraph 10).

Key points for practice

• Where an application for rectification under Rule 353 fails, an appeal combined with an application for suspensive effect remains available to correct the scope of an injunction.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 223.4 and 353

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.