G 0003/99 (Admissibility of joint opposition or joint appeal/HOWARD FLOREY) of 18.02.2002
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2002:G000399.20020218
- Date of decision
- 18 February 2002
- Case number
- G 0003/99
- Petition for review of
- T 0272/95 1999-04-15
- Application number
- 83307553.4
- IPC class
- C12N 15/16
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- Published in the EPO's Official Journal (A)
- Download
- Decision in English
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- Molecular cloning and characterization of a further gene sequence coding for human relaxin
- Applicant name
- Howard Florey Institute of Experimental Physiology & Medicine
- Opponent name
- (01) Aglietta, Amendola et al.
(02) Paul Lannoye - Board
- -
- Headnote
1. An opposition filed in common by two or more persons, which otherwise meets the requirements of Article 99 EPC and Rules 1 and 55 EPC, is admissible on payment of only one opposition fee.
2. If the opposing party consists of a plurality of persons, an appeal must be filed by the common representative under Rule 100 EPC. Where the appeal is filed by a non-entitled person, the Board of Appeal shall consider it not to be duly signed and consequently invite the common representative to sign it within a given time limit. The non-entitled person who filed the appeal shall be informed of this invitation. If the previous common representative is no longer participating in the proceedings, a new common representative shall be determined pursuant to Rule 100 EPC.
3. In order to safeguard the rights of the patent proprietor and in the interests of procedural efficiency, it has to be clear throughout the procedure who belongs to the group of common opponents or common appellants. If either a common opponent or appellant (including the common representative) intends to withdraw from the proceedings, the EPO shall be notified accordingly by the common representative or by a new common representative determined under Rule 100(1) EPC in order for the withdrawal to take effect.
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 104 1973European Patent Convention Art 107 1973European Patent Convention Art 110(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a) 1973European Patent Convention Art 133 1973European Patent Convention Art 133(4) 1973European Patent Convention Art 134 1973European Patent Convention Art 58 1973European Patent Convention Art 99 1973European Patent Convention Art 99(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 1 1973European Patent Convention R 100 1973European Patent Convention R 100(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 26(2)(c) 1973European Patent Convention R 36(3) 1973European Patent Convention R 55 1973European Patent Convention R 55(a) 1973European Patent Convention R 56(2) 1973European Patent Convention R 60(2) 1973European Patent Convention R 66(1) 1973
- Keywords
- Admissibility - Fee for opposition - persons acting in common in filing notice of opposition - common opposition - joint opposition
Admissibility - Fee for appeal - persons acting in common in filing notice of appeal - common appeal - joint appeal
Common representative - Catchword
- -
- Citing cases
- G 0002/04G 0001/12G 0001/13R 0018/09J 0002/01J 0019/13T 0272/95T 0867/96T 1018/98T 0668/99T 0074/00T 1048/00T 0228/01T 0416/01T 0553/01T 0866/01T 0983/01T 0482/02T 0315/03T 0382/03T 1165/03T 1190/03T 0991/04T 1178/04T 0004/05T 0477/05T 0480/05T 1324/05T 1035/06T 1154/06T 0755/09T 1486/10T 0854/12T 0979/12T 0562/13T 1426/13T 1654/13T 2005/13T 0205/14T 0517/14T 1638/14T 1954/14T 0384/15T 0007/17T 1702/17T 0874/18T 1920/18T 0158/19T 0436/19T 1850/19T 1907/20T 0953/21T 1121/21T 0846/22T 0376/23
ORDER
For these reasons, it is decided that the questions of law referred by Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.4 in decision T272/95 are answered as follows:
1. An opposition filed in common by two or more persons, which otherwise meets the requirements of Article 99 EPC and Rules 1 and 55 EPC, is admissible on payment of only one opposition fee.
2. If the opposing party consists of a plurality of persons, an appeal must be filed by the common representative under Rule 100 EPC. Where the appeal is filed by a non-entitled person, the Board of Appeal shall consider it not to be duly signed and consequently invite the common representative to sign it within a given time limit. The non-entitled person who filed the appeal shall be informed of this invitation. If the previous common representative is no longer participating in the proceedings, a new common representative shall be determined pursuant to Rule 100 EPC.
3. In order to safeguard the rights of the patent proprietor and in the interests of procedural efficiency, it has to be clear throughout the procedure who belongs to the group of common opponents or common appellants. If either a common opponent or appellant (including the common representative) intends to withdraw from the proceedings, the EPO shall be notified accordingly by the common representative or by a new common representative determined under Rule 100(1) EPC in order for the withdrawal to take effect.