Article 70

1. The text of a European patent application or a European patent in the language of the proceedings shall be the authentic text in any proceedings before the European Patent Office and in any Contracting State.

2. If, however, the European patent application has been filed in a language which is not an official language of the European Patent Office, that text shall be the application as filed within the meaning of this Convention.

3. Any Contracting State may provide that a translation into one of its official languages, as prescribed by it according to this Convention, shall in that State be regarded as authentic, except for revocation proceedings, in the event of the European patent application or European patent in the language of the translation conferring protection which is narrower than that conferred by it in the language of the proceedings.

4. Any Contracting State which adopts a provision under paragraph 3:
a) shall allow the applicant for or proprietor of the patent to file a corrected translation of the European patent application or European patent. Such corrected translation shall not have any legal effect until any conditions established by the Contracting State under Article 65, paragraph 2, or Article 67, paragraph 3, have been complied with;
b) may prescribe that any person who, in that State, in good faith has used or has made effective and serious preparations for using an invention the use of which would not constitute infringement of the application or patent in the original translation may, after the corrected translation takes effect, continue such use in the course of his business or for the needs thereof without payment.

UPC Case Law:

Court of First Instance 

IPPT20260219, UPC CFI, LD Vienna, Messerle v Sabert

Patent valid and not infringed. (Article 65 UPCA, Article 25 UPCA) Claim interpretation on the basis of the language of the patent (German) (Article 69 EPC, Article 70 (1) EPC). Although the language of the proceedings is English, interpretation and considerations are based on the German text of the patent and the English translations of the claims are read similarly. The German term “Knick” as used in the German language version of claim 1 is understood by the person skilled in the art as a portion of the claimed packaging that is created by folding of card- or paperboard along a predefined folding line, causing in the folded state a visible sharp crease at the interface of two walls or wall-shaped portions of the packaging. Claimant’s argument that a bending radius cannot be used as clear distinction between the English terms “bend” and “fold” […] does not lead to a different result.