At paragraph 9(i) of its judgment the Court of Appeal said -
"The categories [of what are not to be “regarded as inventions” as listed in Article 52(2) of the EPC] are there, but there is nothing to tell you one way or the other whether they should be read widely or narrowly."
But there is in fact (isn't there?) something to tell you whether they should be read narrowly, namely, the very next sub-article, Article 52(3), which provides -
"The provisions of paragraph 2 shall exclude patentability of the subject-matter or activities referred to in that provision only to the extent to which a European patent application or European patent relates to such subject-matter or activities as such." (emphasis added)