In T 4/83 (OJ 1983, 498) the board held that when assessing novelty, it should be taken into consideration that any information in a patent specification which conveyed to the person skilled in the art a technical teaching, belonged to the content of the disclosure irrespective of whether or not it fell within the scope of the claims or what purpose it served.
In T 223/05 the board held that the interpretation of the extent of the protection of a patent was not the task of the EPO, but, according to Art. 64 and 69 EPC 1973, that of the national courts competent in procedures on infringement cases (see T 740/96, T 442/91). In particular, Art. 69 EPC 1973 did not offer any basis for reading into a claim features which could be found in the description when judging novelty (see T 1208/97).