Amycel v Szymon Spyra (CFI, 21 June 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 25 June 2024 (UPC_CFI_195/2024, ACT_23163/2024, App_35134/2024, ORD_35405/2024), the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division (M. Kokke), in provisional measures proceedings brought by Amycel LLC, proprietor of EP 1 993 350, against Szymon Spyra, rejected the request for court-arranged simultaneous English-Polish interpretation at the hearing on 9 July 2024, but allowed the defendant to engage an interpreter at his own expense. The order sets out the two-step assessment under Rule 109 RoP.

Question

Can an individual defendant domiciled in Poland obtain simultaneous interpretation at the hearing as part of the costs of the proceedings under Art. 51(2) UPCA and Rule 109.1 RoP?

Decision

Rule 109 RoP calls for a double appropriateness test: is interpretation appropriate, and should its costs become costs of the proceedings (paragraph 5)? The threshold is low under Rule 109.1 and lower still under Rule 109.4, the judge-rapporteur respects the defendant’s own assessment of his English and allows interpretation in principle (paragraphs 7 and 8). However, Polish is not an official or designated language of the division or of the EPO, and the court cannot provide translations into every language. The defendant expanded his business into UPC territory, where English is the general business language (paragraphs 10 and 11). Court-arranged interpretation is therefore refused at this stage (paragraph 12). The defendant may later seek recovery of interpretation costs as costs of the proceedings if bearing them proves unreasonable, which at least requires Amycel’s action to be dismissed with a costs order against it (paragraph 13).

Key points for practice

• Practical point: a party seeking interpretation into a language outside the UPC system should expect to bear the cost first (Rule 109.4 RoP), subject to later recovery as costs.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts. 51(1), 51(2) and 53(1)(a)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 109.1, 109.2, 109.4, 109.5 and 150

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.