9.3.4 Financial situation of a party

In T 2092/18 the appellant (patent proprietor) requested that the case not be remitted to the opposition division for a discussion of novelty and inventive step since it would be a financial burden and unfair to him who was a private individual. The board held that special reasons under Art. 11 RPBA were immediately apparent in the case in hand as the contested decision had not dealt with the issues of novelty and inventive step. The board further agreed with the respondent (opponent) that showing particular concern for a party's financial situation would go against the principle of procedural equality of the parties to the proceedings. Such a consideration could not justify depriving the respondent of a two-instance procedure with respect to issues never considered by the opposition division.