T 0804/92 (Refrigeration apparatus) du 08.09.1993
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:1993:T080492.19930908
- Date de la décision
- 8 septembre 1993
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0804/92
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 85900817.9
- Classe de la CIB
- H02J 7/00
- 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
- Energy saving refigeration apparatus having a control
- Nom du demandeur
- Thermo Produkter
- Nom de l'opposant
- WAECO
- Chambre
- 3.5.02
- Sommaire
While it is permissible, and even desirable, in proceedings before the EPO for the EPO to draw attention to any discrepancies between the arguments presented and the documents which are supposed to support those arguments, this should always be done in an as neutral and objective way as possible. It is definitely not proper to request the filing of statements under oath having a content suggested by the Opposition Division or any other instance. This involves the risk of leading witnesses and could seriously undermine the probative value of such statements. Such practice should therefore be avoided (point 5 of the reasons for the decision).
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 117(1)(g) 1973European Patent Convention Art 123(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973
- Mots-clés
- Inventive step (yes), after amendment
Sworn statements in writing, contents should not be suggested by EPO
Added subject-matter (no) - Exergue
- -
- Affaires citées
- -
- Affaires citantes
- T 0721/95
ORDER
For these reasons, it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the first instance with the order to maintain the patent in amended form as requested by the Appellant (see paragraph VIII above).