R 19/12

R 19/12 is a decision issued on April 25, 2014 by the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO), in which the Enlarged Board allowed an objection of suspicion of partiality against its Chairman, the Vice-President of Directorate General 3 (DG3) (the Boards of Appeal Directorate), and ordered that he be replaced, because he was also acting as member of the Management Committee of the EPO.[1][2] In 2014, the effects of the decision were said to be potentially far-reaching.[1]

R 19/12

Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office

ECLI:EP:BA:2014:R001912.20140425
Decision issued on April 25, 2014
Board composition
Chairman: B. Günzel
Members: R. Menapace, A. Ritzka
Headwords
Ablehnung wegen Besorgnis der Befangenheit (Recusal for suspicion of partiality)

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.[3][4]

See also
  • Art. 23 1/15, Art. 23 2/15 and Art. 23 1/16, decisions relating to the suspension of a member of the EPO Boards of Appeal
  • Wim van der Eijk, former Vice-President of the EPO, and head of the DG3 (Appeals), who was recused in R 19/12
  • G 2/19, referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal notably dealing with the proper location of the Boards of Appeal

References
  1. Teschemacher, Rudolf (May 5, 2014). "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". EPLAW Patent Blog. Retrieved 5 October 2017.
  2. Smyth, Darren (15 May 2014). "Suspicion of Partiality in Enlarged Board of Appeal found justified". IPKat. Retrieved 5 October 2017.
  3. 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". Review of European Administrative Law. 8 (2): 377–408. doi:10.7590/187479815X14465419060785. hdl:10067/1308360151162165141. 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 (...)
  4. Klett, Kathrin (2017). "Neuorganisation der Beschwerdekammern in der Europäischen Patentorganisation" [Reorganisation of the Boards of Appeal in the European Patent Organisation] (PDF). Sic! (in German) (3): 119. Retrieved 4 February 2018.

Further reading
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.