B. Proceedings before the Enlarged Board of Appeal
  1. Home
  2. Legal texts
  3. Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
  4. Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office
  5. V. Proceedings before the Boards of Appeal
  6. B. Proceedings before the Enlarged Board of Appeal
  7. 3. Petition for review under Article 112a EPC
  8. 3.9. Time limit for filing a petition for review
Print
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email

3. Petition for review under Article 112a EPC

Overview

3.9. Time limit for filing a petition for review

In accordance with Art. 112a(4) EPC, a petition for review shall be filed within two months of notification of the decision of the board of appeal (or within two months of the date on which the criminal act has been established where applicable).

In R 3/21 the Enlarged Board stressed that it could only examine the merits of grounds for review under Art. 112a(2)(a) to (d) EPC which had been substantiated within the two-month time limit under Art. 112a(4), first sentence, EPC. Both the request and the statement of reasons required under R. 107(2) EPC therefore had to be filed within two months of notification of the contested decision.

In R 3/14 the Enlarged Board held that it was essential to observe the two-month time limit expressly prescribed in Art. 112a(4), second sentence, EPC for filing the reasons for the petition and the supporting submissions; no exceptions could be made.

In R 5/14 the Enlarged Board stated that filing a petition and paying the fee before the orally announced decision has been notified to the petitioner in writing did not make it inadmissible under Art. 112a(4) EPC (see also R 20/10).

In R 2/10 the Enlarged Board held that the established jurisprudence of the boards of appeal that mere payment of the appeal fee was not an act which sufficed for the admissible filing of an appeal applied mutatis mutandis to petition for review proceedings.

In R 1/18 the Enlarged Board saw no reason not to apply the findings reached in Opinion G 1/18 (OJ 2020, A26) to the provisions governing the legal effects of late payment of the fee for petition for review and so concluded that the petition for review had to be deemed not filed and that the associated fee had to be reimbursed. The Enlarged Board further concluded that the proper legal effect of late payment of the fee for requesting re-establishment of rights was a finding that the request was deemed not to have been filed and that the fee was to be reimbursed (see also T 46/07 in chapter III.E.9. "Reimbursement of the fee for re-establishment").

Previous
Next
Footer - Service & support
  • Service & support
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
Footer - More links
  • Jobs & careers
  • Press centre
  • Single Access Portal
  • Procurement
  • Boards of Appeal
Facebook
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
Instagram
EuropeanPatentOffice
Linkedin
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
EPO Procurement
X (formerly Twitter)
EPOorg
EPOjobs
Youtube
TheEPO
Footer
  • Legal notice
  • Terms of use
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Accessibility