In T 192/84
(OJ 1985, 39) it was held that if the President of the EPO extended time limits expiring during a period of general interruption in the delivery of mail in a contracting state (R. 85(2) EPC 1973
), a pending application for re-establishment of rights considered to have been lost during that period, which had been filed by a representative having his place of business within that state, had to be deemed to have been made without purpose ab initio, even though the non-observance of the time limit was due to causes other than the interruption in the delivery of mail. Accordingly, it could be declared that no rights were lost and the fee for re-establishment of rights could be refunded. The reformulation of this rule (now R. 134 EPC
, see also chapter VI.D.1.3.1
, interruption in the delivery of mail) does not call this case law into question.