Hurom v NUC Electronics Europe (CFI, 6 August 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 6 August 2025 (UPC_CFI_336/2025, ACT_17336/2024, App_20207/2025), the judge rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division (Judge Böttcher) classified as confidential under Rule 262A RoP the breakdown of hours worked by Hurom’s lawyers, filed on 28 April 2025 in support of its application for a costs decision against NUC Electronics Europe and WARMCOOK (EP 2 028 981), but refused to restrict access to the defendants’ lawyers alone. The order is of interest to any party quantifying its costs before the UPC.

Question

Can the breakdown of lawyers’ hours be protected under Rule 262A RoP and, if so, can access be limited to the opponent’s lawyers or to named individuals?

Decision

Such information falls in principle within Rule 262A RoP: lawyers’ working hours are confidential and privileged, and information belonging to representatives is not excluded a priori, representatives being treated as third parties for the purposes of Art. 58 UPCA. Protection is granted, the defendants already being bound to confidentiality and restricted use. The total and distribution of hours set out in the original application under Rule 150 RoP were, however, already public (Rule 262.2 RoP). The access restrictions are refused: Rule 262A.6 RoP does not allow access to be confined to lawyers without the consent of the party concerned, given the right to be heard, and Hurom showed no agreement limiting access to designated persons. The order supersedes the preliminary order of 29 April 2025 and provides for a penalty payment in the event of a culpable breach.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: a detailed breakdown of hours filed in a costs application can be protected, but it will remain available to the opposing party itself, only what was not already in the public application can be withheld from the public.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 58

Rules of Procedure

Rules 150, 262.2 and 262A

Case law cited

Düsseldorf Local Division, order of 22 April 2025 (UPC_CFI_16/2024), Milan Central Division (seat), order of 5 June 2025 (UPC_CFI_477/2025), cited as a differing view, Paris Central Division (seat), order of 16 July 2025 (UPC_CFI_484/2025).

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.