On 23 September 2025, the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) issued an important order (UPC_CoA_631/2025 and 632/2025) regarding the admission of Apple as an intervener in appeals filed by Ericsson in infringement actions pending before the local division of Milan against ASUS, Arvato et Digital River.
These appeals concerned the refusal of the Milan Local Division to implement an “attorney’s eyes only” confidentiality regime for highly sensitive documents, including licence agreements between Ericsson and Apple.
Apple filed applications to intervene under R.313RoP in support of Ericsson’s position, arguing that these documents contained strategic information that could potentially be disclosed to ASUS, a party to the proceedings opposed to Ericsson.
ASUS contested the intervention, arguing that an appeal concerning a confidentiality regime did not constitute an action capable of being intervened in within the meaning of Rule 313 RoP. Ericsson, on the other hand, did not oppose Apple’s request.
The Court of Appeal rejected ASUS’s position and adopted a broad interpretation of “legal interest in the success of the action”, which is a criteria of admissibility of an application to intervene under R. 313.1 RoP. It held that interim decisions, including orders establishing a confidentiality regime, fully form part of the “result of the action” within the meaning of Rule 313.1 RoP. A third party directly affected by the potential disclosure of sensitive information may therefore intervene, even if it is not a party to the main proceedings.
The Court therefore admitted Apple as an intervener, authorised it to file a brief within 15 days, and allowed it to participate in the hearing.
This decision confirms the growing importance of confidentiality regimes in patent litigation, particularly where sensitive technological agreements are likely to be submitted. It also illustrates the UPC’s openness to third-party interventions aimed at safeguarding their legitimate interests.