a) Explicit withdrawal required

In T 73/17 the board held that the case law interpreting an announcement of non-attendance as an implicit withdrawal of the request for oral proceedings was not transferable to R. 103(4)(c) EPC. According to the board, it followed from the preparatory work and the circumstances of the revision of R. 103 EPC that the legislator drew a clear-cut distinction between a party's simple announcement that it would not be attending oral proceedings and the express withdrawal of its request for them. R. 103 EPC explicitly required that the request for oral proceedings be withdrawn for a partial reimbursement of the appeal fee to be granted; it was insufficient for a reimbursement if oral proceedings were simply not held. According to this interpretation, R. 103(4)(c) EPC thus applies only if the party explicitly withdraws its request for oral proceedings (see also T 191/17 and T 2698/17).