J 0001/20 vom 15.04.2021
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:2021:J000120.20210415
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 15. April 2021
- Aktenzeichen
- J 0001/20
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 10826125.6
- IPC-Klasse
- F03D 1/00F03D 11/04
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- Nicht verteilt (D)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Keine AB-Links gefunden
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- -
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- -
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- DEVICE FOR ESTABLISHING ADMITTANCE AND TRANSPORT OF CARGO TO AND FROM A WIND TURBINE CONSTRUCTION ABOVE GROUND LEVEL
- Name des Antragstellers
- Liftra Aps
- Name des Einsprechenden
- -
- Kammer
- 3.1.01
- Leitsatz
- -
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 121 (2007)European Patent Convention Art 122 (2007)European Patent Convention Art 133 (2007)European Patent Convention R 112 (2007)European Patent Convention R 136 (2007)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 15(1) (2020)
- Schlagwörter
- "Request for re-establishment of rights"
"Removal of the cause of non-compliance - no consideration of the due-care criterion"
"Error of law: due care only relevant for allowability - Excuse of error of law (no)"
"Principle of proportionality: application if conditions of Article 122 EPC are not met - (no)" - Orientierungssatz
- 1. The established approach of applying the due-care criterion to the question of removal of the cause of non-compliance under Rule 136 EPC leads to an additional admissibility requirement, by expanding the scope of the substantive due-care criterion, which has no basis in the EPC.
2. Removal of the cause of non-compliance is a question of fact which occurs on the date on which the person responsible for the application or patent actually became aware of an error (actual knowledge), rather than when this person ought to have noticed the error (presumption of knowledge).
3. Pursuant to Article 122(1) EPC, if failure to observe a time limit is due to an error of fact, the due-care criterion is to be assessed only in the context of the merits of a request for re-establishment of rights.
4. The same applies if failure to observe a time limit is based on an error of law. Thus, the due-care criterion is to be assessed only in the context of the merits of the request and removal of the cause of non-compliance occurs when the responsible person actually became aware of the error of law. - Zitierte Akten
- J 0013/90J 0022/92J 0005/94J 0025/96J 0027/01J 0002/02J 0011/03J 0004/07J 0006/07J 0003/08J 0008/09J 0021/10J 0007/12J 0013/13J 0009/16J 0017/16T 0166/87T 0014/89T 0315/90T 0413/91T 0028/92T 0469/93T 0428/98T 0812/04T 1561/05T 1465/07T 0493/08T 1962/08T 0592/11T 1486/11T 1633/12T 2251/12T 0578/14T 1022/14T 1101/14T 1588/15T 0198/16T 0600/18T 1214/20
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is dismissed.