EPO express

List of all annotated decisions on epo-express

The following list of decisions are decisions of the boards of appeal of the European Patent Office.

The Boards of Appeal are the first and final judicial instance in the procedures before the European Patent Office (EPO). They have the task of reviewing contested decisions of the Office's departments of first instance within the framework of the European Patent Convention (EPC).

boards of appeal

These decisions are incorporated in the Guidelines for Examinationin the European Patent Office. The Guidelines for Examination give instructions on the practice and procedure to be followed in the various aspects of the examination of European applications and patents in accordance with the European Patent Convention and its Implementing Regulations. They do not bind the Examiner, but most of the times Examniners can be convinced to follow the Guidelines.

"The Guidelines cannot cover all possible occurrences and exceptions in every detail, but must be regarded as general instructions that may need to be adapted to the individual case. The application of the Guidelines to individual European patent applications or patents is the responsibility of theof the formalities officers and examiners. As a general rule, parties may expect the EPO to act in accordance with the Guidelines. … It should be noted also that the Guidelines do not constitute legal provisions. For the ultimate authority on practice in the EPO, it is necessary to refer firstly to the European Patent Convention".

The Guidelines however, give a strong indication that the Board of Appeal would follow it's earlier decisions. However, the Board of Appeals are not bound to their earlier decisions. As it has happened sometimes in the past, the Board of Appeal may give up earlier case law if circumstances change. This has happened for example for decisions on computer implemented inventions.

Please click on one of the buttons to follow the link to the annotated decisssion.

Decissions re Re-establishment of rights

J 0005/80 Due care by professional representative

J 0016/82 Substitute of assistant must be trained and supervised on same level as assistant

T 0013/82 Case must be presented in a conclusive manner

J 0081/83 Dealy in delivery of a letter attriuted to Postal Authorities

J 0031/89 Mistake of the law demonstrates lack of due care

T 0413/91 Re-establishment of rights does not offer a backdoor for a deliberately missed action

J 0005/94 Lower level of due care required for an unrepresented applicant than for a represented applicant

J 0002/02 Deliberate action taken by applicant for strategic matters

J 0017/03 In case of doubt or legal uncertainty, reasonably steps are expected from a diligent person

J 0019/05 Lack of submission of substatiated grounds

J 0015/10 Lack of duly substatntiated grounds

T 577/11 No retroactive claim of a priority

J 005/13 Scope of duties expected from a representative with only secondary duties

T 0578/14 Deliberate course of action taken by the applicant demonstrates lack of due care