UPC Court of Appeal: Protection of Confidential Information

According to R 262A.6 RoP, the number of persons to whom access is restricted shall not be greater than is necessary to ensure the parties' rights to effective judicial protection and a fair trial. At least one natural person of each party and the respective lawyers of these parties must be granted access. Whether a specific person can be granted full access under this provision must be assessed according to the relevant circumstances of the individual case, including: the person's role in the proceedings before the court, the relevance of the confidential information to the exercise of that role, and the reliability of the person with regard to maintaining the confidentiality of the information. R 262A.6 RoP does not require that the person entitled to access must be an employee of a party or a representative within the meaning of Article 48 UPCA. Such a requirement does not arise from the wording of the provision and would not be compatible with the principle of free choice of procedural assistants by the parties. Therefore, the fact that the US lawyers are neither employees of the claimant nor representatives within the meaning of Article 48 UPCA does not preclude full access to the confidential information under R 262A RoP (UPC 12. 2. 2025, CoA 621/2024).