G 0002/24 (SKIN CLEANSER) du 25.09.2025
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2025:G000224.20250925
- Date de la décision
- 25 septembre 2025
- Numéro de l'affaire
- G 0002/24
- Requête en révision de
- T 1286/23 2024-11-11
- Numéro de la demande
- 14735118.3
- Classe de la CIB
- A47K 7/04A61H 23/02
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Versions JO
- Aucun lien JO trouvé
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- Résumé de Article 105 EPC
- Titre de la demande
- SKIN CLEANSER
- Nom du demandeur
- FOREO LIMITED
- Nom de l'opposant
- Beurer GmbH
GESKE GmbH & Co. KG - Chambre
- -
- Sommaire
After withdrawal of all appeals, appeal proceedings may not be continued with a third party who intervened during the appeal proceedings in accordance with Article 105 EPC.
The intervening third party does not acquire an appellant status corresponding to the status of a person entitled to appeal within the meaning of Article 107, first sentence, EPC.
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- - 142 III 271- 142 III 629- 20 W (pat) 324/05- 8 C 2.05- Hunt v Aziz [2011] EWHC 714 (Ch)- Ia ZR 212/63- Ia ZR 237/63- MS (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2020] UKSC 9- The Queen on the application of Philip Morris Brands Sarl v Secretary of State for Health [2014] EWHC 3669 (Administrative Court)- X ZB 18/06- Xa ZR 110/08 (BPatG)- UPC CFI 457/2023- UPC CFI 487/2023- UPC CFI 755/2024- UPC ORD 10348/2025- UPC ORD 18404/2024Administrative Law Act (Algemene wet bestuursrecht),Art. 8:12bBundesgerichtshofBundespatentgerichtCivil Procedure Rules (CPR), R. 3.1, 19.2, 38, 38.2, 38.3, 38.5, 54, 54.17Code of Civil Procedure (Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering), Art. 217Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung), Art. 76, 76(1), 76(2)Cour de cassationDecisions of national courts cited:European Patent Convention Art 100European Patent Convention Art 100(a)European Patent Convention Art 100(c)European Patent Convention Art 105European Patent Convention Art 105 1973European Patent Convention Art 105(1)European Patent Convention Art 105(2)European Patent Convention Art 105(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 106European Patent Convention Art 106(1)European Patent Convention Art 107European Patent Convention Art 107 1973European Patent Convention Art 108European Patent Convention Art 112(1)European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a)European Patent Convention Art 112(2)European Patent Convention Art 113European Patent Convention Art 114(1)European Patent Convention Art 115European Patent Convention Art 116European Patent Convention Art 122European Patent Convention Art 123(2)European Patent Convention Art 97(3)European Patent Convention Art 99European Patent Convention Art 99(1)European Patent Convention Art 99(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 99(3)European Patent Convention R 136European Patent Convention R 55 1973European Patent Convention R 57(4) 1973European Patent Convention R 76European Patent Convention R 76(1)European Patent Convention R 79(4) 1973European Patent Convention R 84(2)European Patent Convention R 86European Patent Convention R 89F.-K. Beier/K. Haertel/G. Schricker, 20th edition, July 1997, Art. 106-112, 107 (Moser)FranceFrance - Conseil d'EtatGermanyGermany - BundesverwaltungsgerichtHigh Court of Justice Chancery DivisionLaw of the Contracting States and the Unified Patent Court:Literature:Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 021Rules of procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal Art 10Rules of procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal Art 13Rules of procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal Art 14Rules of procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal Art 9Rules of Procedure, R. 265, 313, 315, 316, 316ASwitzerlandSwitzerland - BundesgerichtThe NetherlandsUnified Patent CourtUnited KingdomUnited Kingdom - Supreme CourtVisser's Annotated European Patent Convention, 2024 edition, Suominen, de Lange, Rudge, Ferara, 2025
- Mots-clés
- admissibility of referrals - yes
referral of a point of law anew: substantiated reasons - yes
intervention during the appeal proceedings - yes
appellant status of the intervener at the appeal stage - no
continuation of the appeal proceedings with the intervener after withdrawal of all appeals - no - Exergue
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that the questions of law referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal are answered as follows:
After withdrawal of all appeals, appeal proceedings may not be continued with a third party who intervened during the appeal proceedings in accordance with Article 105 EPC.
The intervening third party does not acquire an appellant status corresponding to the status of a person entitled to appeal within the meaning of Article 107, first sentence, EPC.