European Patent Office
1994

6 - June

Overview

Index
1-2 - January - February
3 - March
4 - April
5 - May
6 - June
7 - July
8 - August
9 - September
10 - October
11 - November
12 - December
Supplements / Special editions
Supplement to OJ 4/1994
Supplement to OJ 6/1994
Supplement to OJ 9/1994
Special editions

    Pages 347-348

    Citation: OJ EPO 1994, 347

    Online publication date: 30.6.1994

    BOARDS OF APPEAL
    Information from the Enlarged Board of Appeal

    Referrals by Boards of Appeal

    I. In decision T 788/90 dated 28 October 1993, Technical Board of Appeal 3.2.2 referred the following point of law to the Enlarged Board of Appeal under Article 112(1)(a) EPC:

    (Translation)

    1. Given the Enlarged Board of Appeal's new interpretation in decision G 9/91 and opinion G 10/91 of the basis for the opposition procedure, can a European patent be opposed by its own proprietor?

    2. If so, do the Board of Appeal's powers of review in such a case depend on the extent to which the patent was opposed in the notice of opposition?

    The case is pending under Ref. No. G 9/93.

    II. In decision T 933/92 dated 6 December 1993, Technical Board of Appeal 3.4.1 referred the following point of law to the Enlarged Board of Appeal under Article 112(1)(a) EPC:

    (Translation)

    1. In an appeal from a decision of an Examining Division in which one or more specified grounds have been relied upon as grounds for refusal of a European patent application when examining the appeal pursuant to Article 110 EPC, does the Board of Appeal have either the obligation or the power to examine whether the application meets requirements which the Examining Division regarded as having been met, and which therefore have not been relied upon in its decision to refuse the application?

    2. If a Board of Appeal does not have such an obligation, but does have such power, in what circumstances should it use such power?

    The case is pending under Ref. No. G 10/93.

    III. In decision T 169/92 dated 20 December 1993, Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.2 referred the following point of law to the Enlarged Board of Appeal under Article 112(1)a) EPC:

    (Official text)

    Is an intervention which otherwise complies with the conditions laid down in Article 105 EPC admissible when filed during pending appeal proceedings?

    The case is pending under Ref. No. G 1/94.1

     

    1 The same question of law had already been referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal in decision T 27/92 (see OJ EPO 1993, 705). However, these proceedings under Ref. No. G 6/93 were terminated on 16 December 1993.

    Service & support

    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary

    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
    Legal noticeTerms of useData protection and privacyAccessibility