ARTICLE
3 July 2019

Board Of Appeal Moves An Oral Proceedings From Haar To Munich

JA
J A Kemp LLP

Contributor

J A Kemp is a leading firm of European Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys. We combine independent thinking with collective excellence in all that we do. The technical and legal knowledge that we apply to the protection of our clients’ patents is outstanding in its breadth and depth. With around 100 science and technology graduates in the firm, including 50 PhDs, no area of science or technology is outside our scope. Our Patent Attorneys have collective in-depth expertise in patent law and procedure in every country of the world. The team of professionals who advise our clients on trade mark and design matters have backgrounds in major international law firms and hold qualifications as Chartered UK Trade Mark Attorneys, Solicitors and European Trade Mark Professional Representatives. Dedicated to this specialist area of intellectual property protection, the team has the expertise and resources to protect trade marks and designs in any market worldwide.
We reported earlier this year (see here) that the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal has been asked to consider whether the Boards of Appeal can hold oral proceedings in Haar without violating the EPC.
United Kingdom Intellectual Property

We reported earlier this year (see here) that the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal has been asked to consider whether the Boards of Appeal can hold oral proceedings in Haar (which is a suburb of Munich) without violating the EPC. The Boards of Appeal moved from a central Munich location to Haar in 2017. This move was not universally popular, and so the outcome of the referral (which is now pending as G2/19) is awaited with interest.

In the meantime it has come to our attention that a Board of Appeal oral proceedings originally scheduled to take place in Haar has been rescheduled (see here) by the Board of Appeal in question (board 3.3.04) to take place at the former Board of Appeal headquarters in central Munich. The change in location of the oral proceedings happened following a request from one of the parties that the location of the hearing should be moved in view of G2/19.

While the Enlarged Board of Appeal referral G2/19 remains pending, it seems likely that at least board 3.3.04 will move a hearing to Munich upon the request of a party, possibly to forestall the possibility that the Haar location is found to be in conflict with the EPC, and a party claiming to be being disadvantaged later claiming the appeal hearing needs to be re-run.

The fact that the Boards of Appeal are not routinely moving hearings from Haar to Munich, absent any request from any party, points to the interesting possibility that even if the Haar location is found to be in conflict with the EPC, this may not mean all proceedings conducted in Haar are void, absent any contemporaneous complaint from a party.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More