LD Düsseldorf, October 16, 2025, Order Re. Service Of PI Request Under The Hague Convention

1. Key takeaways

If an application for provisional measures is to be served under the Hague Convention, and the authority responsible for the service informs the Court several months after the request that service cannot be effected because the defendant does not exist at the provided address, the Court may deem the steps taken so far sufficient for proper service, provided that the applicant has credibly demonstrated that the address at which service was attempted is correct.

The Court ordered in accordance with R. 275.2 RoP that the steps already taken to bring the application for provisional measures to the attention of the defendant – here: fulfilling all requirements for service under the Hague Convention and asking the Defendant to voluntarily accept service – be regarded as good service, after the Chinese authorities had not disputed that the requirements under the Hague Convention were fulfilled but, instead, had merely informed the Local Division after several months that "no such company [exists] at the address provided". Notably, the Applicant had conducted an independent verification of the address based on the Defendant's business name provided on their Amazon page, based on the information provided by a local Chinese government agency, and based on "www.qcc.com", a third party commercial corporate database providing data on companies registered in China.

In order to enable the Defendant to take note of the present order without service, it was ordered that a separate reference to the present order be made on the Court's publicly available website.

The order stresses that the urgency of provisional measures justifies dispensing with further attempts at service and the six-month waiting period under Art. 15(2) Hague Convention.

2. Division

Local Division Düsseldorf

3. UPC number

UPC_CFI_449/2025

4. Type of proceedings

Procedural order in proceedings regarding provisional measures

5. Parties

APPLICANT:

Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. (Spring, Texas 77389, USA)

DEFENDANTS:

1. Zhuhai ouguan Electronic Technology Co. (Guangdong, China)
2. Andreas Rentmeister e.K. (Freiburg, Germany)

6. Patent(s)

EP 2 826 630 B1 and EP 3 530 469 B1

7. Body of legislation / Rules

Rule 275.2 RoP, Art. 15(2) Hague Convention, Art. 15(3) Hague Convention

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.