T 0803/93 (Representation) of 19.7.1995 | XEPC: EPC and PCT resource

European Case Law Identifier:

ECLI:EP:BA:1995:T080393.19950719

Date of decision:

19 July 1995

Case number:

T 0803/93

Decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal:

G 0004/95

Application number:

85304219.0

IPC class:

G07G 1/06

Language of proceedings:

Distribution:

Download and more information:

Decision text in EN (PDF, 597Â KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in:	EN
Versions:	OJ \| Unpublished v2 \| Published

Title of application:

Apparatus and method for reducing theft from a store

Applicant name:

Bogasky, John J.

Opponent name:

Sensormatic Electronics Corp.

Board:

3.4.01

Headnote:

The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:
I. During oral proceedings before the EPO under Article 116 EPC, and in the context of opposition or opposition appeal proceedings, having regard to the provisions of Article 133 EPC, may a person who is not qualified in accordance with Article 134 EPC to represent parties to proceedings before the EPO, but who is accompanied by a person who is both qualified and authorised to represent a party to the proceedings, make oral submissions on behalf of that party on legal issues which arise in the case?
II. During oral proceedings before the EPO under Article 116 EPC, and in the context of opposition or opposition appeal proceedings, having regard to the provisions of Articles 117 and 133 EPC, may a person who is not qualified in accordance with Article 134 EPC to represent parties to proceedings before the EPO, but who is accompanied by a person who is both qualified and authorised to represent a party to the proceedings, make oral submissions on behalf of that party on technical issues which arise in the case, otherwise than by giving evidence orally in accordance with the provisions of Article 117(3) EPC?
III. In relation to each of questions (1) and (2) above taken separately:
(a) If the answer is "yes", can such oral submissions be made on behalf of the party as a matter of right, or can they only be made with the permission of and under the discretion of the EPO?
(b) If such oral submissions can only be made under the discretion of the EPO, what criteria should be considered when exercising such discretion?
(c) Do special criteria apply to qualified patent lawyers of countries which are not Contracting States to the EPC?

Relevant legal provisions:

European Patent Convention 1973 Art 112
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 117
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 133
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 134

Keywords:

Oral proceedings before Opposition Division
Presentation of Opponent's entire case by person unqualified in accordance with Article 134 EPC
Objection of substantial procedural violation by Proprietor
Referral of questions to Enlarged Board of Appeal

Catchwords:

Cited decisions:

J 0011/94

Citing decisions:

T 0752/93
T 0334/94

Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t930803ex1.html

Date retrieved: 17 May 2021