Error message

Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Optional parameter $type declared before required parameter $nid is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 1442 of includes/bootstrap.inc).

A.113 EPC Right to be heard and basis of decisions

(1)

The decisions of the European Patent Office may only be based on grounds or evidence on which the parties concerned have had an opportunity to present their comments.

(2)

The European Patent Office shall examine, and decide upon, the European patent application or the European patent only in the text submitted to it, or agreed, by the applicant or the proprietor of the patent.

See decisions/opinions of the Enlarged Board of Appeal G 7/91, G 8/91, G 4/92, G 2/04 (Annex I).

Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/epc/2016/e/ar113.html

Date retrieved: 17 May 2021

470 references found. Limiting display to 200 references.

Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.

EPC Articles

X Chapter I Common provisions governing procedure

X A.97 EPC Grant or refusal

X A.112a EPC Article 112a Petition for review by the Enlarged Board of Appeal

EPC Implementing Rules

EPO Guidelines - B Search

X GL B II 4.2 Additional European searches

X GL B III 1.1 Opinions in relation to the search report

X GL B XI 3.8 Making suggestions

EPO Guidelines - C Procedureal Aspects of Substantive Examination

X GL C III 3.3 Refund of additional search fees

X GL C IV 1 General procedure

X GL C IV 3 Further action upon examination of replies

X GL C IV 4 Later stages of examination

X GL C V 4.7.1 Communications/oral proceedings after resumption

X GL C V 4.9 Reply explicitly disapproving the proposed text without indicating an alternative text

X GL C V 6.1 When does the examining division resume examination after approval?

X GL C V 14 Refusal

X GL C V 15 Decision according to the state of the file

X GL C V 15.3 Issuing a self-contained decision

X GL C V 15.4 Issuing a further communication (no refusal)

EPO Guidelines - D Opposition and Limitation/Revocation Procedures

X GL D IV 1.4.2 Deficiencies which may no longer be remedied in accordance with Rule 77(1) and Rule 77 (2) , resulting in the opposition being rejected as inadmissible

X GL D VI 2.1 Basis for the examination

X GL D VI 7.2.1 Procedural requirements

X GL D X 4.4 Further stages of the examination

X GL D X 5 Formal procedure for limitation when the request is allowable

X GL D X 6 Rejection of the request

EPO Guidelines - E General Procedural Matters

X GL E III 1 General

X GL E III 8.3.3.3 Procedure in examination proceedings

X GL E III 8.6 Facts, evidence or amendments introduced at a late stage

X GL E III 10.3 Subject-matter of minutes

X GL E III 11.3 Technical problems

X GL E VI 2 Late-filed submissions

X GL E IX 2.9.3 Rectification of errors made by the receiving Office or the International Bureau

X GL E X 1.1 General remarks

X GL E X 2.1 Examples

X GL E X 2.2 Authoritative text of documents

X GL E X 2.6 Reasoning of decisions

X GL E X 2.9 Main and auxiliary requests

EPO Guidelines - F The European Patent Application

X GL F IV 3.3 Objection under Rule 43(2) or Rule 137(5)

EPO Guidelines - H Amendments and Corrections

X GL H II 2.3 After receipt of the first communication – Rule 137(3)

X GL H II 2.6 Further requests for amendment after approval

X GL H II 7.2 Restriction to an unsearched invention

X GL H II 7.3 No restriction to a single invention searched

X GL H III 2.1.3 Rule 137(4) and oral proceedings

X GL H III 3.1.1 Sequence of requests

X GL H III 3.1.3 Neither main nor auxiliary requests allowable

X GL H III 3.4.1 Written procedure

X GL H III 3.5.1 General principles

X GL H VI 3.1 Admissibility

EPO Guide for Applicants, part II Int. - C The EPO as ISA and SISA

X GA C5.13.6 5.13.6.

Case Law Book

X CLR RPBA Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal (RPBA 2007)

X CLR RPBA2020 Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal – in force as from 1 January 2020

Case Law Book: III Amendments

X CLR III I 2 Order of requests

X CLR III I 9 Appeal procedure

X CLR III V 5.2.3 Distinction between party to proceedings and accompanying person

X CLR III B 1 Introduction

X CLR III B 2.1 Violation of the right to be heard examined ex officio

X CLR III B 2.2.1 Appeal proceedings

X CLR III B 2.3.1 General principles

X CLR III B 2.3.2 The meaning of "grounds or evidence"

X CLR III B 2.3.3 Opportunity to comment on evidence

X CLR III B 2.3.6 Reliance on the International Preliminary Examination Report (IPER)

X CLR III B 2.3.7 Change of provisional opinion

X CLR III B 2.4.1 General principles

X CLR III B 2.4.2 Decision must demonstrably show that arguments were heard and considered

X CLR III B 2.4.4 Failure to consider submissions made after a communication

X CLR III B 2.4.5 Failure to consider evidence

X CLR III B 2.4.6 Mere reference to jurisprudence

X CLR III B 2.5.3 Immediate refusal after communication

X CLR III B 2.6 The right to be heard in oral proceedings

X CLR III B 2.6.1 Introduction of a new claim or relevant document

X CLR III B 2.6.2 Introduction of new arguments

X CLR III B 2.7 The right to be heard in case of the non-attendance of oral proceedings

X CLR III B 2.7.1 Facts and evidence put forward for the first time during oral proceedings in inter partes cases – G 4/92

X CLR III B 2.7.3 Non-attendance at oral proceedings before the boards – Article 15(3) RPBA 2007

X CLR III B 2.7.3.A Ex parte proceedings

X CLR III B 2.7.3.B Inter partes proceedings

X CLR III B 3.1 General

X CLR III B 3.3 The requirement of a text agreed by the applicant

X CLR III B 3.4 Cases where the EPO is uncertain or mistaken about the approval of the text

X CLR III C 2.2 Right to oral proceedings before the Receiving Section

X CLR III C 5.1 Right to present comments and non-attendance of a party by choice

X CLR III C 7.1.1 Speaking time during oral proceedings and interruptions by the board

X CLR III G 1 Introduction

X CLR III G 3.2 Time frame for submitting evidence

X CLR III G 3.3 Right to be heard

X CLR III G 4.1 Principle of free evaluation of evidence

X CLR III K 3.4.2 Right to be heard – right to have submissions taken into consideration

X CLR III K 3.5.4.A Requirements

Case Law Book: IV Divisional Applications

X CLR IV B 2.4.1 Invitation to correct deficiencies and to propose amendments (Rule 71(1) EPC)

X CLR IV B 2.7.2 Waiver of the applicant's right to present comments

X CLR IV B 2.8.1 Introduction

X CLR IV B 2.8.2 Arguments taken into account in the decision of the examining division

X CLR IV B 2.8.3 Information on non-compliance: the essential reasoning

X CLR IV B 2.8.4 Essential reasoning based on an International Preliminary Examination Report (IPER)

X CLR IV B 2.8.6 Bona fide attempt by the applicant to overcome the objections

X CLR IV B 3.2.3.A General issues

X CLR IV B 3.2.3.B Auxiliary request issues

X CLR IV B 3.3.2 Amendments and corrections requested according to Rule 71(6) EPC

X CLR IV B 3.4 Amendment after approval of the text for grant

X CLR IV C 3.4.6 Opportunity to comment on new grounds for opposition

X CLR IV C 6.1 Principle of equal treatment

X CLR IV C 6.2 Invitation to file observations under Article 101(1) EPC

X CLR IV C 6.4 EPO communication concerning submissions by the other party – adequate opportunity to reply

X CLR IV C 6.5 Opportunity to present comments

X CLR IV C 8.2.2 Maintenance of European patent as amended

X CLR IV D 2 Requests for revocation during opposition and opposition appeal proceedings

Case Law Book: V Priority

X CLR V A 4.3 The boards' discretion

X CLR V A 4.5.3 Absence from the oral proceedings

X CLR V A 4.5.3.B Absence of opponent from oral proceedings

X CLR V A 4.11.1 General principles

X CLR V A 4.12.4 Converging or diverging versions of claims

X CLR V A 7.5.5 Remittal to department of first instance ordered

X CLR V A 9.5.8 Right to be heard

X CLR V A 9.5.9 Inadequate reasons given in the decision at first instance

X CLR V A 9.5.11.A Issuing of decision

X CLR V A 9.7.1 Causal link between substantial procedural violation and filing of appeal

X CLR V B 3.4.1 ‍‍Article 112a(2) EPC – grounds for a petition for review

X CLR V B 3.4.2 Grounds listed exhaustively

X CLR V B 3.4.3 No suspensory effect – review of substantive law excluded

X CLR V B 3.6.2.A Recognisable immediately as an objection, defect clear and unambiguous

X CLR V B 3.12 Burden of proof

X CLR V B 4.3.1 General

X CLR V B 4.3.2 "Fundamental" violation of Article 113 EPC – causal link and adverse effect

X CLR V B 4.3.7 Parties' obligation to participate actively in the appeal proceedings

X CLR V B 4.3.8.A No opportunity to comment, surprising reasons

X CLR V B 4.3.8.B Grounds not emanating from the board

X CLR V B 4.3.8.D Reasoning formed part of the proceedings

X CLR V B 4.3.10.A Requirement to have comments considered

X CLR V B 4.3.17 Alleged violation of Article 113(2) EPC

X CLR V B 4.3.18 Further examples of unsuccessful petitions

X CLR V B 4.3.19 Successful petitions under Article 112a(2)(c) EPC

X CLR V B 4.4.1 ‍‍Rule 104(a) EPC – failure to arrange requested oral proceedings

X CLR V B 4.4.3 Successful petition under Rule 104(b) EPC

X CLR V C 2.6.6 Complaints about the conduct of the examination – duties of the Examination Board

Case Law of the Enlarged Board

X G 0007/91 (Withdrawal of appeal) of 5.11.1992

X G 0008/91 (Withdrawal of appeal) of 5.11.1992

X G 0004/92 (Basis of decisions) of 29.10.1993

X G 0002/04 (Transfer of opposition/HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE) of 25.5.2005

X G 0001/10 (Request to correct patent/FISHER-ROSEMOUNT) of 23.7.2012

X G 0002/19 (Rechtliches GehÃ¶r und richtiger Verhandlungsort) of 16.7.2019

General Case Law

X J 0016/08 (Correction of designation/NISSAN) of 31.8.2009

X J 0001/10 (Designation of inventor/KOVAC) of 30.7.2010

X J 0013/10 () of 27.5.2011

X J 0001/13 () of 27.11.2013

X J 0012/15 (Right to oral proceedings; substantial procedural violation (yes); re … of 14.4.2016

X R 0002/09 () of 29.7.2009

X R 0004/09 () of 30.4.2010

X R 0008/09 (Fundamental violation of Article 113) of 23.9.2009

X R 0009/09 () of 22.3.2010

X R 0010/09 () of 22.6.2010

X R 0011/09 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS) of 22.11.2010

X R 0013/09 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/ALCON) of 22.10.2009

X R 0014/09 () of 22.12.2009

X R 0015/09 (Schwerwiegender VerstoÃ gegen Art. 113 EPÃ/GLAS PLATZ) of 5.7.2010

X R 0017/09 (Appeal deemed not filed/BASSI) of 1.10.2010

X R 0018/09 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/JOHNSON) of 27.9.2010

X R 0019/09 (Fundamental violation of Article 113/UNAXIS) of 24.3.2010

X R 0020/09 (Schwerwiegender VerstoÃ gegen Art. 113 (1) EPÃ, sonstiger … of 7.9.2010

X R 0021/09 () of 19.3.2010

X R 0001/10 (Offensichtlich unzulÃ¤ssiger ÃberprÃ¼fungsantrag/Ahrweiler) of 22.2.2011

X R 0003/10 (Right to be heard in oral proceedings/SALMON BRANDS AS) of 29.9.2011

X R 0006/10 (Occlusion apparatus/BOARD OF REGENTS UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM) of 28.7.2010

X R 0009/10 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/SONY) of 10.9.2010

X R 0012/10 () of 14.12.2011

X R 0013/10 () of 24.3.2011

X R 0014/10 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 and R. 104(b) EPC) of 26.1.2011

X R 0015/10 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/SEIKO) of 25.11.2010

X R 0016/10 () of 20.12.2010

X R 0017/10 () of 15.6.2011

X R 0019/10 () of 16.3.2011

X R 0020/10 (Grounds for review/BOREALIS TECHNOLOGY OY) of 25.8.2011

X R 0021/10 (Violation prÃ©tendue fondamentale de l'Art. 113(1)/BRIDGESTONE … of 16.3.2011

X R 0022/10 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/ZALTRON) of 7.3.2011

X R 0023/10 (Offensichtlich unbegrÃ¼ndeter ÃberprÃ¼fungsantrag/LUK) of 15.7.2011

X R 0001/11 () of 27.6.2011

X R 0002/11 (Violation fondamentale allÃ©guÃ©e de l'article 113(1) CBE/KSB S.A.S … of 23.11.2011

X R 0004/11 (Pour spout fitments/ELOPAK SYSTEMS) of 16.4.2012

X R 0005/11 () of 22.8.2011

X R 0006/11 (Petition for review/DU PONT) of 4.11.2011

X R 0007/11 () of 5.10.2011

X R 0008/11 () of 29.11.2011

X R 0009/11 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/KUREHA CORPORATION) of 7.12.2012

X R 0010/11 () of 9.11.2011

X R 0011/11 (Petition clearly unallowable) of 14.11.2011

X R 0013/11 (Petition for review/VECTURA) of 20.4.2012

X R 0014/11 (Objection under Rule 106 EPC/Celanese International) of 5.7.2012

X R 0015/11 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/IVIS TECHNOLOGIES) of 13.5.2013

X R 0016/11 () of 23.3.2012

X R 0017/11 () of 19.3.2012

X R 0018/11 () of 22.11.2012

X R 0019/11 () of 2.10.2012

X R 0021/11 (Relevanter Antrag nicht entschieden/BAYER) of 15.6.2012

X R 0002/12 () of 17.10.2012

X R 0003/12 () of 29.8.2012

X R 0004/12 (Violation fondamentale allÃ©guÃ©e de l'article 113(1) CBE) of 20.12.2012

X R 0006/12 () of 18.1.2013

X R 0007/12 () of 6.12.2013

X R 0011/12 (Right to be heard in oral proceedings) of 19.7.2013

X R 0012/12 (Antrag auf ÃberprÃ¼fung/DEUTSCHE SISI-WERKE) of 14.1.2013

X R 0013/12 () of 14.11.2012

X R 0014/12 (Petition for review/Hydro-QuÃ©bec-) of 25.10.2013