Netherlands: Limitation of claim changes in appeal

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Netherlands: Limitation of claim changes in appeal

In Dutch court practice, an appeal is of a devolutive nature, that is in appeal the case is reconsidered as a whole. However, in a recent interlocutory decision (November 3 2015, High Point v KPN), the Appeal Court in The Hague found that the patentee was not entitled to further limit his claims.

During the first instance case, High Point had already filed three sets of limited claims on which the court had based its decision. With the statement of appeal, High Point attacked the decision of the court of first instance and only later, although clearly in advance of the oral hearing, did High Point file a new set of further limited claims.

High Point's arguments that these new claims would simplify and accelerate the procedure, that it would always be possible to decrease the demand of relief and/or that the EPC would give the patentee the right to limit the patent, were not convincing. The appeal court determined that such a late filing of a limited claim set would not fit with the practice that in appeal no new facts or arguments are filed after the statement of appeal that could start a new discussion between parties.

On the other hand, the argument from KPN that by introducing this new set of claims High Point has abandoned the claim sets that were on file, was not accepted by the court, either.

This (interlocutory) decision now has the consequence that the case will proceed on the basis of the three claim sets on which the court in first instance has decided.

Bart van Wezenbeek


V.O.Johan de Wittlaan 72517 JR The HagueThe NetherlandsTel: +31 70 416 67 11Fax: +31 70 416 67 99info@vo.euwww.vo.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The UK-India trade deal doesn’t mention legal services, showing India has again failed to agree on a move that could help foreign firms and local practitioners
Eva-Maria Strobel reveals some of the firm’s IP achievements and its approach to client relationships
Lateral hires at Thompson Hine and Pierson Ferdinand said they were inspired by fresh business opportunities and innovative strategies at their new firms
The launch of a new IP insurance product and INTA hiring a former USPTO commissioner were also among the top talking points this week
The firm explains how it secured a $170.6 million verdict against the government in a patent dispute surrounding airport technology, and why the case led to interest from other inventors
Developments of note included the court partially allowing a claim concerning confidentiality clubs and a decision involving technology used in football matches
The firm said adding capability in the French capital completes its coverage of all major patent litigation jurisdictions as it strives for UPC excellence
Marc Fenster explains how keeping the jury focused on the most relevant facts helped secure a $279m win for his client against Samsung
Clients are divided on what externally funded IP firms bring to the table, so those firms must prove why the benefits outweigh the downsides
Rahul Bhartiya, AI coordinator at the EUIPO, discusses the office’s strategy, collaboration with other IP offices, and getting rid of routine tasks
Gift this article