ArcelorMittal v XPENG (CFI, 9 January 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 9 January 2025 (UPC_CFI_583/2024), the President of the Court of First Instance (Judge Butin), after consulting the panel, granted the application of XPENG and sixteen other defendants to switch to English, the language in which EP 3290200 was granted, in the infringement action brought in French by ArcelorMittal before the Paris Local Division. The order admits a Rule 323 application made outside a preliminary objection and allocates the burden of translation.

Question

Is an application to change the language under Rule 323 admissible outside the preliminary objection under Rule 19, and what translations follow?

Decision

Rule 19(c) only concerns the language of the statement of claim under Rule 14, whereas Rule 323 allows a change on grounds of convenience and fairness, so the application was admissible (section 1). As ArcelorMittal had expressly agreed, English applies from the date of the order (section 2). The claimant must provide an English translation of the statement of claim at its own expense. The parties have 10 days to agree on the exhibits to be translated, which the claimant must translate at its expense within 30 days (section 3). Costs are reserved to the final stage (section 4).

Key points for practice

• Practical point: a defendant may seek a switch to the language of grant under Rule 323 without being confined to the preliminary objection, with the translation burden falling on the claimant.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 49(1), (2), (4) and (5), Art. 69 and Art. 73(2)(a)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 14, 19(c), 220, 321.1, 323 and 324

Case law cited

Court of Appeal (UPC_CoA_101/2024 and UPC_CoA_207/2024), Hamburg Local Division, 22 October 2024 (UPC_CFI_525/2024)

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 10 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.