UPC Court of Appeal: Suspensive Effect

Pursuant to Article 74(1) UPCA, an appeal does not have suspensive effect unless the Court of Appeal decides otherwise upon a reasoned request by one of the parties. The Court of Appeal can therefore only grant the request if the circumstances of the individual case justify an exception to the principle that an appeal does not have suspensive effect. It must be examined whether, due to these circumstances, the appellant's interest in maintaining the status quo until the decision on their appeal exceptionally outweighs the interest of the respondent, especially if the contested order or decision is manifestly erroneous or if the appeal would lose its purpose without suspensive effect (UPC 18. 4. 2025, CoA 166/2025). The applicant justifies its request for suspensive effect by arguing that the factual submission regarding priority was not expressly contested by any party. The applicant is operating under an incorrect understanding of the scope of R 171.2 RoP, which states that an uncontested factual assertion between the parties is considered true. Even if an uncontested circumstance exists, this does not mean that the legal consequence claimed automatically follows. It remains up to the court to decide whether the facts presented justify such a legal consequence. The related assessment by the court of first instance will be reviewed and decided by the Court of Appeal as part of the substantive decision (UPC 17. 4. 2025, CoA 312/2025, CoA 325/2025). The risks of enforcement problems raised by the applicant are not such that they would render the appeal purposeless without suspensive effect (UPC 17. 4. 2025, CoA 329/2025).