| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1992:T001791.19920826 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 26 August 1992 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0017/91 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 83903805.6 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | B26B 21/56 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Razor blades | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | The Gillette Company | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Wilkinson Sword GmbH | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.2.02 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Late submission of public prior use Inventive step - yes |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
An assertion of public prior use, based on the opponent's own activities and submitted after the expiry of the opposition period and in the absence of good reasons for the delay, represents an abuse of the proceedings and a breach of the principle of "good faith" which all parties are expected to observe. Therefore, this kind of assertion cannot be deemed to have been submitted in due time, and it is to be disregarded under Article 114(2) EPC irrespective of its potential relevance. As soon as evidence is in the possession of the opponent and it is recognisable that it could be highly relevant to the validity of the patent it should be submitted in the proceedings (cf. point 5 of the Reasons). |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: | |||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t910017eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021