| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1992:T010991.19920115 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 15 January 1992 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0109/91 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 83302478.9 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C12N 15/00 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | |||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Composite plasmid | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | AJINOMOTO CO. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | DEGUSSA AG | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.02 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Novelty - burden of proof - Weight of evidence in opposition proceedings - Remittal to Opposition Division for further examination of novelty |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
The standard burden of proof in opposition cases is generally expressed as proof on the balance of probabilities, absolute certainty is not required but a degree of probability which in human experience verges on certainty. If the evidence is such that the Division or the Board can conclude "we think it more probable than not", the burden is discharged. The burden of proof may shift constantly as a function of the weight of the evidence (cf. point 2.10 of the Reasons for the Decision). |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t910109eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021