Viatris Santé v Merz Pharmaceuticals (CoA, 19 December 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

The Court of Appeal disposes, under Rule 360 RoP, of the procedural appeal brought by Viatris Santé against the order of the Paris Local Division of 29 October 2025 (UPC_CFI_697/2025), which had disregarded late-filed exhibits in provisional measures proceedings brought by Merz on French SPC No. 13C0033 (based on EP 2 377 536). Since the application for provisional measures was rejected on 21 November 2025, the exclusion of the exhibits no longer harms Viatris. Its practical value lies in the reminder that a party may ask for wrongly rejected exhibits to be admitted in the opponent’s appeal, without a separate appeal (Rule 222.2 RoP).

Question

Does a procedural appeal against the exclusion of exhibits retain any purpose once the application for provisional measures has been rejected in the appellant’s favour?

Decision

Rule 360 RoP also applies on appeal: an appellant without any remaining legal interest is not entitled to a decision, and this holds for procedural appeals (paragraphs 9 and 10). The rejection of Merz’s application means that the exclusion of the exhibits no longer prejudices Viatris, so the appeal under Rule 220.2 RoP is devoid of purpose. Viatris may request the admission of the exhibits in Merz’s appeal (UPC_CoA_917/2025), the Court not being bound by the exclusion ordered at first instance (paragraph 11). No costs decision is made, as the order does not conclude the action (paragraph 12).

Key points for practice

• A party whose exhibits were disregarded but which succeeded at first instance can rely on them in the opponent’s appeal, without a separate appeal, under Rule 222.2 RoP (paragraph 11).
• Disposing of a moot appeal by order under Rule 360 RoP does not entail a costs decision where it does not end the action (paragraph 12).

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 220.2, 222.2, 333, 353 and 360

Case law cited

EOFlow v Insulet, Court of Appeal, 9 January 2025, UPC_CoA_584/2024, Mammut v Ortovox, Court of Appeal, 25 September 2024, ICPillar v SVF Holdco, Court of Appeal, 16 September 2024.

Related decisions

• Merz Therapeutics v Viatris Santé, 21 November 2025, order of the Paris Local Division rejecting the application for provisional measures.
• Merz Pharmaceuticals v Viatris Santé, 27 April 2026, decision of the Court of Appeal in appeal UPC_CoA_917/2025.

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.