Key takeaways
Change of language of proceedings prioritizes fairness and the defendant’s position
The language of proceedings may be changed to the language in which the patent was granted if fairness and the defendant’s situation so require. The defendant’s position is decisive, especially where both parties are international and English is the common business and technical language. The claimant’s flexibility in forum and timing is balanced by the defendant’s stricter procedural deadlines.
Enforcement-related arguments are of limited relevance
Arguments about the language of enforcement are not decisive when determining the language of proceedings. The focus is on the parties’ situation during the proceedings, not on potential enforcement after judgment.
Internal working language and technical field are relevant
The language commonly used in the technical field and for internal coordination is a key factor in the assessment. Where both parties operate internationally and use English, this supports a change to English.
Division
LD Munich
UPC number
UPC_CFI_448/2025
Type of proceedings
infringement action, language of the proceedings
Parties
Applicants/Defendants: Renault Retail Group Deutschland GmbH, Germany; Renault Deutschland AG, Germany; Renault S.A.S., France
Respondent/Claimant: Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited, Singapore
Patent
EP 3 726 780
Body of legislation / Rules
Rule 323 RoP, Art. 49(5) UPCA, Art. 73(2)(a) UPCA, Rule 220 RoP
