UPC Court of Appeal: Suspensive effect

The claimant and appellant filed an application for preserving evidence and an application for inspection against the defendant. The Local Division of Milan granted both applications. The orders granting them were then executed at the defendant's premises and the Court’s experts submitted their reports to the court in sealed envelopes, which also contained the official report of the bailiff and the evidence collected during the inspection. The claimant filed an application for access to the expert reports. In the impugned order, the court dismissed the application for disclosure of the expert reports, revoked the provisional measures to inspect the premises and preserve evidence, ordered the return to the defendant of all evidence collected through the execution of the revoked measures, and awarded the defendant reimbursement of costs. The claimant appealed against this and also applied for suspensive effect, as otherwise the appeal could not fulfil its purpose. The application for suspensive effect is granted. Pursuant to Art 74(1) UPCA, an appeal generally has no suspensive effect unless the Court of Appeal decides otherwise at the motivated request of one of the parties. The Court of Appeal may grant the request if the circumstances of the case justify an exception. It must therefore be examined whether the claimant's interest in maintaining the status quo until the decision on its appeal exceptionally outweighs the defendant's interest. An exception may apply if enforcement would make the appeal devoid of purpose. This is the case here, as the return of the evidence would be difficult to reverse. Furthermore, the suspensive effect of the appeal does not significantly affect the legitimate interests of the defendant (UPC 2.5.2024, CoA 177/2024).