T 0390/86 (Changed composition of Division) of 17.11.1987
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:1987:T039086.19871117
- Date of decision
- 17 November 1987
- Case number
- T 0390/86
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 80200435.8
- IPC class
- C10G 47/20
- 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
- -
- Applicant name
- Shell
- Opponent name
- -
- Board
- 3.3.01
- Headnote
1. An Opposition Division has power to give a final substantive decision (here, relating to the patentability of individual claims) before sending a communication under Rule 58(4) EPC.
2. In a case where a final substantive decision has been given, an Opposition division has no power thereafter to continue examination of the opposition in relation to the issues which are the subject of that decision, either under Rule 58(5) EPC or at all. Further submissions from the parties relating to such issues are inadmissible.
3. A decision must at least be written on behalf of and represent the views of the members appointed to decide the proceedings, and must bear signatures which indicate this.
4(a) The written reasons for a decision delivered during oral proceedings can only be signed by members of the deciding body who took part in the oral proceedings. The same principle applies if between the orally delivered decision and the written decision proceedings in accordance with Rule 58(4) EPC have taken place.
4(b) In a case where a final substantive decision has been given orally by an Opposition Division during oral proceedings, if the subsequent written decision giving the reasons for such oral substantive decision is signed by persons who did not constitute the Opposition Division during the oral proceedings, the decision is invalid.
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 101 1973European Patent Convention Art 102 1973European Patent Convention Art 113 1973European Patent Convention Art 116 1973European Patent Convention Art 15 1973European Patent Convention Art 19 1973European Patent Convention R 58(4) 1973European Patent Convention R 66(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 67 1973European Patent Convention R 68 1973European Patent Convention R 70 1973
- Keywords
- Changed composition of Division
Oral decision/subsequent written decision signed by person who did not make oral decision - decision invalid
Decision invalid/ person signing did not take part in oral proceedings - Catchword
- -
- Cited cases
- -
ORDER
For these reasons, it is decided that
1. The Decision of the Opposition Division given orally on 8 October 1985, and the written decision dated 11 September 1986 are set aside.
2.The appeal fees of both Appellants are to be reimbursed.
3.The case is remitted to the Opposition Division for re-examination.