Nagravision v Pinterest Germany (CFI, 20 January 2026)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 20 January 2026 (UPC_CFI_1506/2025), the President of the Court of First Instance changed the language of Nagravision’s infringement action against three Pinterest companies before the Munich Local Division from German to English, the language of EP 3 965 466. The claimant’s domicile in Switzerland, where German is an official language, was not enough to defeat the request. The order gives particular weight to the need for several defendants in one group to coordinate in their working language under the UPC’s strict time limits.

Question

Should the language of the proceedings change to English under Art. 49(5) UPCA where the claimant is established in a German-speaking country and the defendants work in English?

Decision

Following the Court of Appeal, the defendant’s position is decisive where the parties are in a comparable situation, since the claimant chose the forum and the timing of the action. Nagravision’s Swiss domicile is an important factor, but it belongs to a multinational group. For Pinterest, English is the internal working language and coordination between the defendants would suffer. English dominates the technical field, and the language of the patent matters for its scope. Pinterest’s activity on the German market is not relevant in itself, and the parallel US and German national proceedings carry less weight. The change comes at an early stage, without delay or translation of existing documents.

Key points for practice

• The need for several defendants to coordinate in their working language weighs heavily in favour of the language of the patent.
• A defendant’s business on the market of the division’s country does not by itself justify keeping that division’s language.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts 49(1), (2) and (5) and 73(2)(a)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 13.1(i), 220.1(c) and 321 to 324

Case law cited

Curio Bioscience v 10x Genomics, Court of Appeal, 17 April 2024 (UPC_CoA_101/2024), Court of Appeal, 5 September 2024, UPC_CoA_207/2024, Court of Appeal, 18 September 2024, UPC_CoA_354/2024, UERAN v Xiaomi, Court of Appeal, 19 December 2025 (UPC_CoA_902/2025)

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.