T 0699/97 () of 3.8.1999

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:1999:T069997.19990803
Date of decision: 03 August 1999
Case number: T 0699/97
Application number: 91905061.7
IPC class: B22F 3/04
B22F 3/12
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: C
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 11 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Method of manufacturing mouldings
Applicant name: Asea Brown Boveri AB
Opponent name: Crucible Materials Corporation
Board: 3.2.03
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 102(3)(a)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 113(2)
Keywords: Revocation - at the application of the patentee


Cited decisions:
T 0073/84
T 0186/94
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. In its decision dated 14 May 1997 the Opposition Division maintained the European patent No. 0 517 764 in amended form.

II. The Appellants (Opponents) appealed against the decision of the Opposition Division on 25 June 1997, requesting that the patent be revoked. The appeal fee was paid on 25 June 1997 and the statement of grounds filed on 15 September 1997.

III. In a letter dated 12 July 1999 the Respondents (proprietors of the patent) stated that they no longer approved of the text on the basis of which the patent was granted or upheld by the Opposition Division, respectively.

Reasons for the Decision

1. The appeal complies with Articles 106 to 108 and Rule 64 EPC and is admissible.

2. The Respondent's statement in his letter dated 12 July 1999 that he no longer approves of the text in which the patent was granted or upheld by the Opposition Division, respectively, has to be construed as a statement requesting revocation of their European patent, (cf. decision T 186/94, OJ EPO 1986, 79).

3. Since it follows from the provision according to Article 113(2) EPC that a European patent cannot be maintained against the proprietor's will, the present European patent has, therefore, to be revoked (cf. T 73/84, OJ EPO 1985, 241).


For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The European patent No. 0 517 764 is revoked.

Quick Navigation