Paris Local Division
UPC_CFI_468/2023
Final decision
of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court
delivered on 29/01/2025
concerning confirmation by the Court of a settlement

APPLICANT
C-KORE SYSTEMS LIMITED
3 Bramley's Barn, The Menagerie, Skipwith
Road - YO19 6ET - Escrick - GB
Represented by
Denis Schertenleib

RESPONDENT
NOVAWELL
22 Allée des Caravelles
34280 - Carnon-Plage – FR
Represented by
Jérôme Ferrando

PATENT AT ISSUE
Patent no. Proprietor
EP2265793 C-KORE SYSTEMS LIMITED

COMPOSITION OFPANEL– FULLPANEL
Presiding judge & Camille Lignières
Judge-rapporteur
Legally qualified judge Carine Gillet
Legally qualified judge Alima Zana
Technically qualified judge Frédéric Gaillarde

LANGUAGE OFPROCEEDINGS: English

DECISION
SUMMARY OF FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS:
On 15 December 2023, C-KORE lodged an infringement action based on EP 2 265 793 against
NOVAWELL before the Paris Local Division of the Unified Patent Court.
NOVAWELL filed a counterclaim for revocation with the Statement of Defense on 28 March 2024.
According to Rule 365 of the RoP, NOVAWELL filed an application on 12 December 2024 to request
the withdrawal of the counterclaim for revocation, as the parties reached a settlement a few days
before the oral hearing scheduled for 17 December 2024.
C-KORE confirmed via email on 13 December 2024, that they are requesting a decision to affirm a
settlement, following the Confidential Deed of the agreement signed on 10 December 2024,
between C-KORE and NOVAWELL (hereinafter “the Parties”).
Due to a technical issue with the CMS, C-KORE filed the R 365 RoP application on 23 January 2025.
PARTIES’ REQUESTS
Both Parties, C-KORE and NOVAWELL, request from the Court an order under Rule 365 ruling that:
“1. The Proceedings and Counterclaim are dismissed.
2. The details of the Confidential Deed of Settlement are confidential in accordance with Rule
365(2).
3. There shall be no order as to costs.”

GROUNDS
Concerning the confirmation by the Court of the settlement:
Rule 365.1 RoP states that:
“1. Where the parties have concluded their action by way of settlement, they shall inform the
judge-rapporteur. The Court shall confirm the settlement by decision of the Court [Rule 11.2], if
requested by the parties, and the decision may be enforced as a final decision of the Court.”
Rule 11.2 RoP states that:
“2. Pursuant to Rule 365 the Court shall, if requested by the parties, by decision confirm the terms
of any settlement or arbitral award by consent (irrespective of whether it was reached using the
facilities of the Centre or otherwise), including a term which obliges the patent owner to limit,
surrender or agree to the revocation of a patent or not to assert it against the other party and/or
third parties. The parties may agree on costs to be awarded or may request the Court to decide on
costs to be awarded in accordance with Rules 150 to 156 mutatis mutandis.
In the case at hand, the Parties entered into a settlement agreement on 10 December 2024, ending
the litigation between them.
The Court has no objection to confirming this settlement agreement, which is attached to this
decision.
Under Rule 365.2 RoP, settlement details shall be kept confidential further to the parties’ request.
Concerning the costs:

Rule 365.4 RoP states that: “4. The judge-rapporteur shall give a decision as to costs following the
terms of the settlement or, failing that, at his discretion.”
Rule 11.2 RoP in fine states that: “The parties may agree on costs to be awarded or may request
the Court to decide on costs to be awarded in accordance with Rules 150 to 156 mutatis mutandis.
In the case at hand, the Parties agreed on costs and requested no order relating thereto.
The Court notes that the parties did not apply for seeking reimbursement of fees under Rules 370.9
(c) (iii) RoP and 370.11 RoP.

The Court:
-Confirms the settlement concluded on 10 December 2024 between C-KORE and NOVAWELL,
-Orders that the settlement agreement will be annexed to the decision,
-Declares that the unredacted version will remain confidential,
-Notes that the Parties agreed on costs and request no order as to costs.

Issued in Paris, 29 January 2025.

Information about appeal
An appeal against the present Decision may be lodged at the Court of Appeal, by any party that
has been unsuccessful, in whole or in part, in its submissions, within two months of the date of
its notification (Art. 73(1) UPCA, R. 220.1(a), 224.1(a) RoP).
Information about enforcement (Art. 82 UPCA, Art. Art. 37(2) UPCS, R. 118.8, 158.2, 354, 355.4
RoP) An authentic copy of the enforceable decision or order will be issued by the Deputy-
Registrar upon request of the enforcing party, R. 69 RegR.

Decision details
Order no. ORD_68856/2024 in ACTION NUMBER: ACT_592899/2023
UPC number: UPC_CFI_468/2023
Action type: Infringement Action
Related proceeding no. Application No.: 65953/2024
Application Type: APPLICATION_ROP_365
10 December
10 December