2026-08-11 - LD Mannheim - Bf Exaqc et al. v. Google - UPC-CFI-0002082/2026

Even though the respective size of the parties and their domiciliation are important factors to decide on an application pursuant to R. 323 RoP, the fact that the Claimants have demonstrated their capacity to litigate in English by filing other actions in comparable circumstances shall be taken into account and considered with regard to the need for efficient communication and coordination of the adverse party that must prepare its defence within strict time constraints.

The President of the Court of First Instance granted Google's application under Art. 49(5) UPCA and R. 323 RoP to change the language of the proceedings before the Mannheim Local Division from German to English, the language in which the patents were granted. Applying the Court of Appeal's framework, the President accepted that English is the language most commonly used in the field, that the claimants are SMEs domiciled in Germany and the defendants a far larger group, and that on materially identical facts an earlier application between the same claimants had failed. The change was nevertheless granted because of a new circumstance: the claimants had since brought infringement actions in English before the Munich and Düsseldorf Local Divisions in comparable circumstances, which demonstrates their capacity to litigate in that language and removes the detriment the earlier order had protected them from. Weighed against the defendants' need to coordinate defence work in their working language within strict time limits, size and domicile could not be decisive. The order was not made conditional on translation or interpretation arrangements, simultaneous interpretation remaining available later on reasoned request under R. 109 RoP.