Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing v Microsoft (CoA, 9 October 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

In an order of 9 October 2024 (UPC_CoA_586/2024), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismissed as inadmissible Suinno’s request for discretionary review of the Paris Central Division’s order of 30 September 2024 requiring it to provide security for Microsoft’s costs in the infringement action on EP 2 671 173 (UPC_CFI_164/2024). Suinno had not asked the Division for leave to appeal. The order restates the sequence of remedies against procedural orders.

Question

Is a request for discretionary review admissible where the party did not first ask the Court of First Instance for leave to appeal, the impugned order being silent on the available remedies?

Decision

Discretionary review under Rule 220.3 RoP is available only where the order requires leave to appeal under Rule 220.2 RoP and the Court of First Instance has refused it within fifteen days (paragraphs 12 and 13). The indication of remedies under Rule 158.3 RoP is not leave to appeal, and its omission, for which the Rule sets no consequence, neither removes the party’s right to seek leave nor amounts to implied leave (paragraphs 14 to 17). A party must first ask the Division for leave. Only if that request is refused may it seek discretionary review (paragraph 18). As Suinno had not done so, its request was inadmissible (paragraph 19).

Key points for practice

• An order’s silence on available remedies does not relieve a party of the need to seek leave to appeal from the Division (paragraph 16).
• Practical point: against an order for security for costs, leave to appeal must be sought from the Court of First Instance before any request for discretionary review.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 73(2)(b)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 158.3, 158.4, 220.1, 220.2, 220.3, 220.4 and 355

Case law cited

Microsoft v Suinno, Court of Appeal (standing judge), 21 August 2024, Court of Appeal, 11 April 2024, UPC_CoA_79/2024

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.