T 0272/95 (Admissibility of joint opposition or joint appeal) vom 15.04.1999
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:1999:T027295.19990415
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 15. April 1999
- Aktenzeichen
- T 0272/95
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 83307553.4
- IPC-Klasse
- C12N 15/16
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- Im Amtsblatt des EPA veröffentlicht (A)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- T 0272/95 Relaxin/HOWARD FLOREY INSTITUTE 2002-10-23
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- -
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- Molecular cloning and characterization of a further gene sequence coding for human relaxin
- Name des Antragstellers
- Howard Florey Institute of Experimental Physiology and Medicine
- Name des Einsprechenden
- Aglietta, Amendola et al., Fraktion der Grünen im EP
- Kammer
- 3.3.04
- Leitsatz
The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal: 1. Is an opposition admissible which otherwise meets the requirements of Article 99 EPC and Rule 55 EPC if it is filed jointly by two or more persons and only one opposition fee is paid?
2. If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative and a common representative was named under Rule 100(1) EPC in the notice of opposition, is an appeal valid even if it is not filed by this person?
3. If the answers to questions 1 and 2 are in the affirmative, which other requirements, if any, have to be met by a joint opposition or a joint appeal in order to safeguard the rights of the patent proprietor?
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 108 1973European Patent Convention Art 112 1973European Patent Convention Art 125 1973European Patent Convention Art 133 1973European Patent Convention Art 134 1973European Patent Convention Art 150 1973European Patent Convention Art 20 1973European Patent Convention Art 24 1973European Patent Convention Art 58 1973European Patent Convention Art 59 1973European Patent Convention Art 78 1973European Patent Convention Art 99 1973European Patent Convention R 100 1973European Patent Convention R 101 1973European Patent Convention R 102 1973European Patent Convention R 106 1973European Patent Convention R 17 1973European Patent Convention R 26 1973European Patent Convention R 55 1973European Patent Convention R 60 1973European Patent Convention R 63 1973European Patent Convention R 64 1973European Patent Convention R 65 1973European Patent Convention R 66 1973European Patent Convention R 78 1973European Patent Convention R 81 1973European Patent Convention R 85 1973European Patent Convention R 90 1973European Patent Convention R 92 1973Patent Cooperation Treaty Art 9Patent Cooperation Treaty R 2Patent Cooperation Treaty R 90Rules relating to fees Art 2
- Schlagwörter
- Joint oppositions - fees due - common representative - joint appeals - admissibility - important point of law - referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal
- Orientierungssatz
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:
1. Is an opposition admissible which otherwise meets the requirements of Article 99 EPC and Rule 55 EPC if it is filed jointly by two or more persons and only one opposition fee is paid?
2. If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative and a common representative was named under Rule 100(1) EPC in the notice of opposition, is an appeal valid even if it is not filed by this person?
3. If the answers to questions 1 and 2 are in the affirmative, which other requirements, if any, have to be met by a joint opposition or a joint appeal in order to safeguard the rights of the patent proprietor?