Bardehle secures use of VAR technology for Uefa at the European Championships

The local division Hamburg sees no reason to prohibit Uefa and Kinexon from using its technology in video-assistant referee (VAR). The three judges led by presiding judge Sabine Klepsch rejected a corresponding application by the Dutch company yesterday evening (case no: ACT_16267/2024).

This means that nothing stands in the way of the VAR technology being used at the European Championships in Germany, which begin next week. The judges have not yet announced the reasons for their decision. In addition to Klepsch, Stefan Schilling and Samuel Granata are also involved.

According to reports from those involved in the proceedings, the judges doubted the urgency of the PI application at yesterday’s hearing. The judges also did not clearly confirm the question of infringement of European patent EP 1944067. EP 067 is owned by Ballinno and covers a ‘method and system for detecting an offside situation’.

The technology analyses an audio signal to determine the moment a player kicks the ball, which a referee can then use to determine if another player was offside at the moment the ball was kicked. Thus, EP 067 is an extension of VAR, albeit with its technology specifically applied to the offside rule.

This means that Uefa and Kinexon can continue to use their technology. However, Ballinno can still lodge an appeal against the judgement with the UPC Court of Appeal. However, this would probably come too late to prevent the technology from being used at the European Championship.

Ballinno must first wait for the written reasons. Even if the company submits the appeal fairly quickly, it remains to be seen whether the Court of Appeal will reach a decision before the end of the European Championship on 14 July.

Rapid decision-making

In late April, the Dutch company Ballinno had filed the PI claim against joint defendants Uefa and Kinexon. The latter is a software and hardware company based in Munich.

In the meantime, Kinexon has also filed an action for annulment against EP 067 with the central division in Paris. Ballionno has so far refrained from filing an infringment claim. In any case, this would only prohibit the use of the technology after the European Championships. Ballinno could also claim damages from Uefa and Kinexon in lengthy and expensive proceedings. It remains to be seen whether the privately financed company will go to such lengths.

Bardehle takes the win instead of Bird & Bird

In the case German firm Vossius & Partner and Dutch firm Brinkhof have once again teamed up under their Vossius & Brinkhof UPC Litigators brand. In September 2022, the two firms announced the launch of the brand, which bundles all UPC-related client advisory activities under ‘Vossius & Brinkhof UPC Litigators’.

Rien Broekstra, partner at Brinkhof in Amsterdam, led the hearing on Ballinno’s behalf yesterday. He was assisted by Vossius partner Georg Rauh, Vossius associate Luisa Huber and Brinkhof associate Eveline Lots.

Under the umbrella brand both firms also filed another active claim for Agfa against Gucci over a printing technology with the UPC.

Uefa and Kinexon had originally instructed a German team from international law firm Bird & Bird as official representatives. A mixed team from Bardehle Pagenberg was co-counselling. However, Bardehle partner Tilman Müller-Stoy then took the lead for the oral hearing.

Patent attorneys Christian Haupt and Marius Fischer as well as lwyers Stefan Lieck and Ann-Christine Hug completed the Bardehle team. With 21 active lawsuits and 26 cases on the defendant side, Bardehle is currently one of the most active law firms at the UPC.