Sunstar Engineering Europe v CeraCon (CFI, 30 May 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 30 May 2025, the judge rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division determined, for clarification purposes, that Sunstar Engineering Europe had validly chosen English as the language of the proceedings in its infringement action on EP 4 108 413 against CeraCon (UPC_CFI_745/2024). The claimant’s auxiliary requests under Art. 49(3) and (5) UPCA therefore required no decision. The order confirms that a claimant may litigate in English before a German local division against a German defendant where the alleged infringement covers several Member States.

Question

Was the claimant’s choice of English, the language of the patent, valid before the Mannheim Local Division, the defendant being established in Germany?

Decision

Yes. The claimant drafted its statement of claim in English and designated that language in the formalities section, in accordance with Art. 49(2) UPCA and Rule 14.2. English is the language of the patent. Since the alleged infringement concerns several Member States, including Germany and Italy, the restriction in Rule 14 does not apply: the claimant could also have sued before an Italian division under Art. 33(1)(a) and was not confined to the division of the defendant’s seat. The defendant, which had replied in English, did not comment on the judge rapporteur’s preliminary view.

Key points for practice

• The choice of the language of the patent is made in the statement of claim. An auxiliary request under Art. 49(3) or (5) becomes moot where that choice is valid.
• The availability of other fora under Art. 33(1)(a) supports the validity of choosing English before the division of the defendant’s seat.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts 33(1)(a) and 49(2), (3) and (5)

Rules of Procedure

Rule 14.2

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.