European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2001:T077798.20010330 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Date of decision: | 30 March 2001 | ||||||||
Case number: | T 0777/98 | ||||||||
Application number: | 93912386.5 | ||||||||
IPC class: | C09D 5/44 | ||||||||
Language of proceedings: | DE | ||||||||
Distribution: | A | ||||||||
Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
Title of application: | - | ||||||||
Applicant name: | Vianova Resins AG | ||||||||
Opponent name: | BASF Coatings AG | ||||||||
Board: | 3.3.07 | ||||||||
Headnote: | I. If a party to proceedings requests re-establishment of rights on the basis that a document missed an EPO time limit because it did not arrive within the standard delivery time, that party will have to prove that the form of postage used would normally have ensured that the document would reach the EPO on time. II. Consideration of whether the party exercised due care with regard to the time limit, given that he assumed the document in question would be delivered by Deutsche Post AG within the standard delivery time (left open). |
||||||||
Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
Keywords: | Standard delivery times Due care - application of national standards (left open) All due care (no) |
||||||||
Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
Citing decisions: |
|
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t980777ep1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
6 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)