6. Termination of appeal proceedings

In T 1687/17 the board noted that all the relevant arguments raised by the parties during the appeal proceedings had already been put forward and considered in the first-instance proceedings. No new arguments had been presented on appeal, as acknowledged by the parties at the oral proceedings. On all issues, the board agreed with the opposition division's findings and the reasons given for the contested decision and so considered it expedient to put its decision in abridged form in respect of all those issues, as per Art. 15(8) RPBA 2020.

In T 2227/15 the board stated that in accordance with Art. 15(8) RPBA 2020, the reasons for its decision were given in abridged form for those issues in respect of which the board agreed with the findings of the opposition division. This clearly did not apply to the appellant's submissions which contained issues on which the impugned decision was not based within the meaning of Art. 12(2) RPBA 2020. Recourse to Art. 15(8) RPBA 2020 required that the board agreed with the findings and reasoning of the decision under appeal in respect of one or more issues. The board concluded from this precondition of concurrence with (parts of) the decision under appeal as well as from the legislator's intention (see explanatory notes to Art. 15(7) and (8) RPBA 2020) that in the reasons for the decision in hand it was possible for the board to refer to those parts of the findings and reasons in the decision under appeal with which it agreed. The board followed the similar approach in decision T 1687/17. The board considered that referring to parts of the publicly accessible decision under appeal, and making clear that it fully agreed with and adopted them as its own, was equivalent, but preferable for reasons of procedural economy, to a "copy and paste" or an unnecessary re-phrasing of such parts from the decision under appeal in the board's decision. See also chapter V.A.6.8.1 "Simultaneous application of Article 13 RPBA 2007 and Article 13(1) RPBA 2020".