Innovative Sonic v OPPO & Ors (UPC_CoA_838/2025)
Decision date:
01 December 2025
Osborne Clarke summary
- Innovative Sonic had initiated infringement proceedings in the Munich LD against the defendants (referred to collectively as Oppo). Oppo applied for a change of language of the proceedings from German to English, which was granted by the President of the Court of First Instance.
- Innovative Sonic appealed the decision of the President and requested that the Court of Appeal set aside the order. Innovative Sonic maintained that drafting foreign language pleadings would generate additional expenditure for both parties as they both have German representatives. It also alleged that the common language of the technology of the patent in suit was irrelevant to the change of language proceedings and the fact that each LD of the Court of First Instance offers English as an additional language should not restrict a claimant’s right to choose the official language it has chosen. It also noted that there were two German speaking judges on the panel of the Munich LD, which it said suggested that the use German would be more efficient.
- In making the decision, the President had addressed the issue of fairness by considering all the relevant circumstances relating to the case. For example, the language commonly used in the technology in question, the position of the parties, including their nationality, domicile, respective size, and how they could be affected by the requested change of language, as well as the internal working language of the parties, the possibility of internal coordination and support on technical issues, with a particular focus on the defendant’s position.
- The Court of Appeal concluded that the President had rightly exercised her discretion when assessing fairness and granting the request for the change of the language to English (the language in which the patent was granted).
- The Court of Appeal consulted the panel in the Munich LD. The presiding judge replied on behalf of the panel noting that English offered all parties the “same ability to understand and express themselves”. As such, the appeal was dismissed.
Issue
Curious about how UPC decisions might impact your business? Have questions about the UPC?
Reach out to our patents team for expert guidance and support.