|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:1992:T013489.19920217|
|Date of decision:||17 February 1992|
|Case number:||T 0134/89|
|IPC class:||C09D 3/70|
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||A process for coating a substrate with a liquid coating composition|
|Applicant name:||ASTRA SOCIETE DE PEINTURE ET VERNIS|
|Relevant legal provisions:||
|Keywords:||Refund of an appeal fee (no, following G 2/91)|
Reimbursement of appeal fee (no)
Summary of Facts and Submissions
European patent No. 0 083 139, granted in respect of European patent application No. 82 201 648.1, was opposed by two parties. The opposition division rejected the oppositions and both parties appealed. During the appeal proceedings the proprietor of the patent withdrew his approval of the text in which the patent was granted but did not submit an amended text. By an interlocutory decision dated 6 May 1991 the Board revoked the patent. However, in view of a question of law arising from the decision T 73/88 - 3.3.1 of 7 November 1989 (for Headnotes see OJ EPO 1990/05), which has been referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal by the decision T 604/89 - 3.4.2 of 15 March 1991 (to be published in the OJ EPO), the Board deferred the decision whether or not one of the two appeal fees should be refunded. By its decision G 2/91 of 29 November 1991 (to be published in the OJ EPO) the Enlarged Board decided that no appeal fee can be refunded for the only reason that there was already another appeal in existence.
Reasons for the Decision
Since it is now clear from the decision G 2/91 of the Enlarged Board of Appeal that there was a valid ground for the payment of the appeal fee by Appellant II as well, the appeal fee paid by the latter is not refunded.
For these reasons, it is decided that:
The appeal fee paid by Appellant II shall not be refunded.