T 1095/06 (Re-establishment/GREENWICH) du 07.05.2008
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T109506.20080507
- Date de la décision
- 7 mai 2008
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 1095/06
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 00974679.3
- Classe de la CIB
- B01J 20/10
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Distribuées aux présidents des chambres de recours (C)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Versions JO
- Aucun lien JO trouvé
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- Silicate/aluminate materials
- Nom du demandeur
- University of Greenwich
- Nom de l'opposant
- -
- Chambre
- 3.3.07
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- Decision AC of 28 June 2001 Art 001(5)European Patent Convention Art 122 1973European Patent Convention Art 122(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 122(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 122(3) 1973European Patent Convention Art 122(4) 1973European Patent Convention Art 23 1973Revision Act 2000 Art 7
- Mots-clés
- Isolated mistake by representative - all due care (no)
Special circumstances (no)
Re-establishment (no) - Exergue
- (1) The case law on "an isolated mistake in an otherwise satisfactory system" cannot be relied on to ignore a failure to act by the professional representative himself, unless there are special circumstances which make the failure to act compatible with taking all due care (see points 5 and 6).
(2) A belief that an action has been performed for which there is no objective basis cannot be given any weight as a circumstance to be taken into account under Article 122(1) EPC (see point 8).
(3) Neither the importance of an application to an applicant, nor the technical merit of the invention concerned, are circumstances that can be taken into account in favour of allowing re-establishment (see point 17).
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The request for re-establishment under Article 122 EPC into the period for filing the notice of appeal and for payment of the appeal fee is refused.
2. The appeal is deemed not to have been filed.