T 0606/06 du 23.04.2008
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T060606.20080423
- Date de la décision
- 23 avril 2008
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0606/06
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 99938911.7
- Classe de la CIB
- F23J 17/00F23G 5/32
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Distribuées aux présidents et aux membres des chambres de recours (B)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Versions JO
- Aucun lien JO trouvé
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- Heating and incineration device
- Nom du demandeur
- Ludwig, Mark
- Nom de l'opposant
- -
- Chambre
- 3.2.03
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 123(2)European Patent Convention Art 78 1973European Patent Convention Art 85 1973European Patent Convention R 33(2) 1973European Patent Convention R 33(5) 1973European Patent Convention R 34 1973European Patent Convention R 47 1973
- Mots-clés
- Abstract part of contest of application as filed (no)
Reimbursement of appeal fee (no) - Exergue
- The abstract as originally filed does not form part of the content of the application as filed for the purposes of Article 123(2) EPC 2000 (T 0246/86). The word "merely" in Article 85 EPC 1973 is to be understood as meaning "only" and the word "shall" in Rule 33(2) EPC 1973 is to be understood in the sense of "should" or "ought to". In the case of any discrepancy between the abstract as originally filed and the description, claims and drawings as originally filed, it is the latter which prevails.
- Affaires citantes
- T 0287/06
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the Examining Division for further prosecution.
3. The request for costs, to include at least reimbursement of the appeal fee, is refused.