European Patent Office

J 0027/92 (Media Storage System) du 20.05.1994

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
ECLI:EP:BA:1994:J002792.19940520
Date de la décision
20 mai 1994
Numéro de l'affaire
J 0027/92
Requête en révision de
-
Numéro de la demande
89913194.0
Classe de la CIB
G06F 13/10
Langue de la procédure
Anglais
Distribution
Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)
Téléchargement
Décision en anglais
Autres décisions pour cet affaire
-
Résumés pour cette décision
-
Titre de la demande
Control for a rotating media storage system
Nom du demandeur
Maxtor
Nom de l'opposant
-
Chambre
3.1.01
Sommaire

I. The principle of good faith governing relations between the EPO and applicants applies to courtesy services provided by the EPO. Where such service has been rendered, an applicant is entitled to rely upon its content if the communication from the EPO was the direct cause of the action taken and, on an objective basis, it was reasonable for the appellant to have

been misled by the information. These principles apply not only to written communications but also to oral communications by the EPO, (paragraphs 3.1 to 3.3 of the Reasons for the Decision).

II. Rule 85b EPC does not take precedence over application of Article 9(1), fourth sentence, of the Rules relating to Fees (J 11/85 (OJ EPO, 1986, 1) followed; see paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2 of the Reasons for the Decision).

III. It is reasonable to define the concept of a "small amount lacking" in Article 9(1), fourth sentence, Rules relating to Fees, as a fixed proportion of the amount of the particular fees to be paid. At most 20% of the fee to be paid may be regarded as small within the meaning of the said provision (T 290/90 (OJ EPO 1992, 368) followed; T 905/90 (OJ 1993 Special Edition, 69) distinguished; see paragraph 5.6 of the Reasons for the Decision).

Mots-clés
Good faith - EPC courtesy services - EPO oral communications - small amount lacking
Exergue
-

ORDER

For these reasons,it is decided that:

1. The Decision of the Receiving Section dated 20 February 1992 is set aside.

2. Reimbursement of the surcharge and of the appeal fee is ordered.