Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/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 /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).
For general information on Art. 24 EPC, see chapter III.J. "Suspected Partiality". The present chapter deals with decisions of the Enlarged Board under Art. 112a(2)(a) EPC.
In R 21/11 the Enlarged Board stated that the only condition for the fee for a petition for review to be reimbursed under R. 110 EPC is that the proceedings before the board of appeal are re-opened (a reimbursement request is not required).
The replacement of board members under R. 108(3) EPC after a petition for review has been held allowable lies in the discretion of the Enlarged Board, to be exercised fairly and proportionately in the light of the facts (R 21/11).
If the petition is allowable, the Enlarged Board sets aside the decision of the board of appeal and orders the re-opening of the proceedings before the board (R. 108(3) EPC). The limitation of the petition for review to a particular part of the decision (e.g. the non-reimbursement of the appeal fee) is admissible.