According to an obiter dictum in T 239/96, the board took the view that, in the absence of a provision on cross‑appeal (in German "Anschlussbeschwerde"), reformatio in peius could not be ruled out altogether under the EPC, as it might serve as a means of avoiding unnecessary litigation, while still satisfying the legitimate expectations of the parties for a fair hearing. The board found that this deficiency in the EPC (i.e. the lack of a cross-appeal) was of prime importance when considering the respondent's procedural position and the issue of reformatio in peius.