This legal decision from the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court addresses an application concerning the protection of confidential information under Rule 262A RoP. The court emphasizes balancing the need for confidentiality with ensuring the right to a fair trial. Ericsson sought an 'External Eyes Only' (EEO) regime to protect certain license agreements, which was opposed by ASUS and rejected by the lower court, leading to this appeal.

The court reiterates that employees should not be denied access to confidential information solely because of their employment status, as this would hinder the party's ability to effectively participate in the trial. The appeal involves confidentiality of Ericsson's license agreements, and the court's decision allows access to confidential info to include one individual from each party, not strictly limited to external experts, rejecting the EEO regime.

The decision highlights the importance of appropriate representation and maintaining confidentiality, especially when third-party interests are involved in license agreements.