T 0367/90 (Fee reduction) of 02.07.1991
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:1991:T036790.19910702
- Date of decision
- 2 July 1991
- Case number
- T 0367/90
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 84114954.5
- IPC class
- G01R 31/36
- Language of proceedings
- French
- Distribution
- No distribution (D)
- Download
- -
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- T 0367/90 1992-06-30
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- Procédé de mesure de l'état de décharge d'une pile et appareil mettant en oeuvre ce procédé
- Applicant name
- ASULAB
- Opponent name
- N.V.Philips
- Board
- 3.4.01
- Headnote
The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:
(1) When must a document drawn up in an admissible non-EPO language be filed for entitlement to the fee reduction referred to in Rule 6(3) EPC to be secured?
(2) More specifically, is it possible to file such a document on the same day as a translation of it in an EPO official language without losing entitlement to the fee reduction?
(3) In the case of an appeal, is it necessary to file the statement setting out the grounds of appeal in an admissible non- EPO language for entitlement to the fee reduction referred to in Rule 6(3) EPC to be secured?
(4) If the answer to question (3) is yes and the consequent requirement has not been met within the time limit laid down in Article 108 EPC, is it appropriate to regard 20 per cent of the appeal fee as a "small amount lacking" within the meaning of Article 9(1) of the Rules relating to Fees? Furthermore, is the appeal admissible if the amount outstanding is paid after expiry of the time limit for payment laid down in Article 108 EPC?
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a) 1973European Patent Convention Art 14(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 14(4) 1973European Patent Convention R 6(3) 1973Rules relating to fees Art 9(1)
- Keywords
- Entitlement to appeal fee reduction
Questions referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - Catchword
- -
- Cited cases
- -
- Citing cases
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
Under Article 112(1)(a) EPC, the following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:
(1) When must a document drawn up in an admissible non-EPO language be filed for entitlement to the fee reduction referred to in Rule 6(3) EPC to be secured?
(2) More specifically, is it possible to file such a document on the same day as a translation of it in an EPO official language without losing entitlement to the fee reduction?
(3) In the case of an appeal, is it necessary to file the statement setting out the grounds of appeal in an admissible non- EPO language for entitlement to the fee reduction referred to in Rule 6(3) EPC to be secured?
(4) If the answer to question (3) is yes and the consequent requirement has not been met within the time limit laid down in Article 108 EPC, is it appropriate to regard 20 per cent of the appeal fee as a "small amount lacking" within the meaning of Article 9(1) of the Rules relating to Fees? Furthermore, is the appeal admissible if the amount outstanding is paid after expiry of the time limit for payment laid down in Article 108 EPC?