Sun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication (CFI, 21 July 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 31 July 2025 (UPC_CFI_362/2025, ORD_33183/2025), the Paris Local Division (Presiding Judge Lignières as judge rapporteur, Judges Gillet and Kupecz) set the protection regime for confidential information produced by the patentee in Sun Patent Trust’s infringement action against three Vivo companies under EP 3 407 524, against the background of FRAND discussions. The order allows wider access on the defendants’ side to highly confidential information.

Question

Does a non-disclosure agreement between the parties bar an application under Rule 262A RoP, and who on Vivo’s side may access highly confidential information?

Decision

The NDA is contractual and does not render inadmissible an application under Rule 262A RoP, which establishes a court-ordered regime. The information is classified as confidential or highly confidential. Exhibits HRM 9.1 and 9.3 are protected in full, since a partly redacted version would be of no use. Besides Vivo’s representative and his team, three natural persons from Vivo, one per defendant, may access the highly confidential information, as assessing whether an offer is FRAND requires knowledge of other licences. Barring those employees from future licensing negotiations is held disproportionate absent a concrete risk of misuse. The general request concerning external experts is rejected, as experts must be named individually. No destruction order is made at this stage, and public access is not decided absent a third-party request.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: a prior NDA does not prevent recourse to Rule 262A RoP, restrictions sought beyond the access circle must be supported by a concrete risk.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 58

Rules of Procedure

Rules 105.2, 115, 220.2, 262.1(b), 262.2, 262A and 263

Directive (EU) 2016/943

Art. 2(1) and Art. 9

Case law cited

QIAGEN Sciences v bioMérieux, 15 July 2025, Düsseldorf Local Division (UPC_CFI_181/2025), Milan Local Division, 20 June 2025 (UPC_CFI_319/2024 and UPC_CFI_728/2024), Daedalus Prime v Xiaomi, 12 February 2025, Court of Appeal (CoA_621/2024)

Related decisions

• Sun Patent Trust v Vivo, 31 July 2025, parallel confidentiality order in action UPC_CFI_361/2025 (EP 3 852 468).

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.