Case Law
Rule 321 : Application by both parties to use of the language in which the patent was granted as language of the proceedings

Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division, Order dated 18/10/2023, Plant-e Knowledge B.V., Plant-e B.V. v. Arkyne Technologies S.L. (Case number UPC_CFI_239/2023, [ORD_581189/2023->https://www.unified-patent-court.org/en/node/457)
Example of decision to change the language of the procedure: “As R. 323 RoP refers to Art. 49 (5) UPCA abovementioned which – as well as for the case of the initiative coming from both parties, one party or the judge-rapporteur addressed in Art. 49 (3) and (4) UPCA – does not specify any timeframe for such request possibly made “at any time during the written procedure”, it shall not be interpreted as precluding that an application to use the language in which the patent was granted can be lodged before the statement of defense is lodged in accordance with Rule 23 RoP.
Besides its lack of relevance with regard to the whole legal frame constituted by Art. 49 UPCA and R. 321 to 323, such interpretation would in addition be counter to the general aims as mentioned in the Preamble of the RoP which provide in particular in Point 4 that “Flexibility shall be ensured by applying all procedural rules in a flexible and balanced manner with the required level of discretion for the judges to organize the proceedings in the most efficient and cost effective manner” considering indeed that the obligation for the defendant to apply for a language change at the occasion of the statement of defense is likely to slow down the course of the proceedings.”