G 0001/14 (Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal) of 19.11.2015
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2015:G000114.20151119
- Date of decision
- 19 November 2015
- Case number
- G 0001/14
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 08716627.8
- IPC class
- F01N 3/28F01N 3/035F01N 13/18
- Language of proceedings
- German
- Distribution
- Published in the EPO's Official Journal (A)
- Download
- Decision in German
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- ABGASANLAGE
- Applicant name
- Tenneco GmbH
- Opponent name
- J. EBERSPÄCHER GMBH & CO. KG
- Board
- -
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a)European Patent Convention R 126(1)European Patent Convention R 126(2)European Patent Convention R 126(4)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 22(2)
- Keywords
- Admissibility of the referral of a point of law to the Enlarged Board of Appeal [no]
Rule 126(1) (as in force until 31 March 2015) - Catchword
- 1. If a board of appeal refers a point of law to the Enlarged Board under Article 112(1)(a) EPC, it is primarily up to the former to explain, in its referral decision, that and why it believes it needs an Enlarged Board ruling on the point arising in the case before it. This is also clear from Article 22(2), second sentence, RPBA, requiring the referring board to state the context in which the point originated.
2. In any event, the Enlarged Board must examine whether the referral fulfils the criteria of Article 112(1)(a) EPC (including that a "decision is required") and is thus admissible.
3. But if the referral is clearly the result of misapplying the law, and on a correct application an answer from the Enlarged Board is no longer necessary for the decision in the appeal proceedings, it is to be dismissed as inadmissible.
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The referral is inadmissible.