| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2001:T077800.20010706 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 06 July 2001 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0778/00 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 93911720.6 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | B65B 31/02 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | DE | ||||||||
| Distribution: | A | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | - | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | INAUEN MASCHINEN AG | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | WEBOMATIC Maschinenfabrik W. R. Grace & Co. |
||||||||
| Board: | 3.2.04 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | I. Article 108, second sentence, EPC is not to be interpreted as meaning that merely sending the EPO a debit order for the appeal fee constitutes a valid means of filing the appeal (following J 19/90). II. The absence of a reference to Rule 65 EPC in the annex to the communication of the possibility of appeal does not make the communication incomplete or misleading. |
||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Notice of appeal - debit order not suuficient Communication of possibility of appeal - deficient (no) Protection of legitimate expectations (no) Period of grace (no) |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t000778ep1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
34 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.Offical Journal of the EPO
XOJ EPO SE 1/2021, p179 - Annex 1 - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2020)
XOJ EPO SE 1/2020, p174 - Annex 1 - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2019)
XOJ EPO SE 1/2019, p158 - XVI. - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2018)