Knowledge

R 19/12

Source đź“ť

30: 227:
Baldan, Federica; Van Zimmeren, Esther (2015). "Exploring Different Concepts of Judicial Coherence in the Patent Context: The Future Role of the (New) Unified Patent Court and its Interaction with other (Old) Actors of the European Patent System".
256:
In particular, organisational and managerial reforms for a separation of the judiciary from the executive branches of the EPOrg were required following decision R 19/12 of the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBoA) of 25 April 2014
347: 130:
Following the decision, an organisational and structural reform of the EPO has been undertaken aiming at a clearer separation of the Boards of Appeal, i.e. the judiciary of the EPO, from its executive branch.
176: 177:"EPO – Vice-president DG3 as Chairman of the Enlarged Board of Appeal – Conflict of interests between the tasks as member of the management and as a presiding judge in review cases" 304: 112: 120: 140: 309: 123:
Directorate), and ordered that he be replaced, because he was also acting as member of the Management Committee of the
270: 202: 155:, referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal notably dealing with the proper location of the Boards of Appeal 332: 124: 149:, former Vice-President of the EPO, and head of the DG3 (Appeals), who was recused in R 19/12 8: 15: 273:[Reorganisation of the Boards of Appeal in the European Patent Organisation] 250: 241: 245: 237: 146: 127:. In 2014, the effects of the decision were said to be potentially far-reaching. 319: : "Suspected partiality of the Chairman of the Enlarged Board of Appeal" 271:"Neuorganisation der Beschwerdekammern in der Europäischen Patentorganisation" 143:, decisions relating to the suspension of a member of the EPO Boards of Appeal 341: 119:
against its Chairman, the Vice-President of Directorate General 3 (DG3) (the
116: 302:
Legal Research Service for the Boards of Appeal, European Patent Office,
115:(EPO), in which the Enlarged Board allowed an objection of suspicion of 348:
Case law of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office
203:"Suspicion of Partiality in Enlarged Board of Appeal found justified" 29: 333:
R 0019/12 (Ablehnung wegen Besorgnis der Befangenheit) of 25.4.2014
152: 43: 113:
Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office
36:
Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office
226: 339: 170: 168: 111:is a decision issued on April 25, 2014 by the 174: 305:Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO 165: 141:Art. 23 1/15, Art. 23 2/15 and Art. 23 1/16 96:Ablehnung wegen Besorgnis der Befangenheit 249: 340: 98:(Recusal for suspicion of partiality) 268: 230:Review of European Administrative Law 200: 175:Teschemacher, Rudolf (May 5, 2014). 13: 296: 48:Decision issued on April 25, 2014 14: 359: 323: 242:10.7590/187479815X14465419060785 28: 91: 60: 262: 220: 194: 83: 52: 42: 18: 1: 201:Smyth, Darren (15 May 2014). 159: 46::EP:BA:2014:R001912.20140425 27: 7: 134: 10: 364: 308:(9th edition, July 2019), 251:10067/1308360151162165141 269:Klett, Kathrin (2017). 75:R. Menapace, A. Ritzka 281:(in German) (3): 119 181:EPLAW Patent Blog 106: 105: 102: 101: 79: 78: 54:Board composition 355: 331: 316: 312: 291: 290: 288: 286: 276: 266: 260: 259: 253: 224: 218: 217: 215: 213: 198: 192: 191: 189: 187: 172: 147:Wim van der Eijk 121:Boards of Appeal 92: 61: 32: 16: 363: 362: 358: 357: 356: 354: 353: 352: 338: 337: 329: 326: 314: 310: 299: 297:Further reading 294: 284: 282: 274: 267: 263: 225: 221: 211: 209: 199: 195: 185: 183: 173: 166: 162: 137: 47: 33: 12: 11: 5: 361: 351: 350: 336: 335: 325: 324:External links 322: 321: 320: 298: 295: 293: 292: 261: 236:(2): 377–408. 219: 193: 163: 161: 158: 157: 156: 150: 144: 136: 133: 104: 103: 100: 99: 88: 87: 81: 80: 77: 76: 69: 68: 57: 56: 50: 49: 40: 39: 25: 24: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 360: 349: 346: 345: 343: 334: 328: 327: 318: 307: 306: 301: 300: 280: 272: 265: 258: 252: 247: 243: 239: 235: 231: 223: 208: 204: 197: 182: 178: 171: 169: 164: 154: 151: 148: 145: 142: 139: 138: 132: 128: 126: 122: 118: 114: 110: 97: 94: 93: 90: 89: 86: 82: 74: 71: 70: 66: 63: 62: 59: 58: 55: 51: 45: 41: 38: 37: 31: 26: 23: 22: 17: 303: 283:. Retrieved 278: 264: 255: 233: 229: 222: 210:. Retrieved 206: 196: 184:. Retrieved 180: 129: 108: 107: 95: 84: 72: 64: 53: 35: 34: 20: 19: 330:(in German) 285:4 February 160:References 117:partiality 67:B. Günzel 212:5 October 186:5 October 85:Headwords 65:Chairman: 342:Category 135:See also 73:Members: 109:R 19/12 21:R 19/12 317:.6.2.3 153:G 2/19 275:(PDF) 257:(...) 207:IPKat 287:2018 279:Sic! 214:2017 188:2017 44:ECLI 311:iii 246:hdl 238:doi 125:EPO 344:: 277:. 254:. 244:. 232:. 205:. 179:. 167:^ 315:j 313:. 289:. 248:: 240:: 234:8 216:. 190:.

Index


ECLI
Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office
partiality
Boards of Appeal
EPO
Art. 23 1/15, Art. 23 2/15 and Art. 23 1/16
Wim van der Eijk
G 2/19


"EPO – Vice-president DG3 as Chairman of the Enlarged Board of Appeal – Conflict of interests between the tasks as member of the management and as a presiding judge in review cases"
"Suspicion of Partiality in Enlarged Board of Appeal found justified"
doi
10.7590/187479815X14465419060785
hdl
10067/1308360151162165141
"Neuorganisation der Beschwerdekammern in der Europäischen Patentorganisation"
Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO
iii.j.6.2.3
R 0019/12 (Ablehnung wegen Besorgnis der Befangenheit) of 25.4.2014
Category
Case law of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑