tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post6728898261314349142..comments2024-03-29T13:59:42.629+00:00Comments on The IPKat: I think (I'm a company), therefore I am? EPO Enlarged Board seeks comments on resuscitated companiesVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-37999685091323322542013-09-09T13:26:56.250+01:002013-09-09T13:26:56.250+01:00Clearly the EPO should fully accept national law r...Clearly the EPO should fully accept national law relating to judical bodies/entities and natural persons. The EPO, the board of Appeal and the enlarged board of appeal are simply not qualified for these matters, and national laws and courts in most EPC-member states provide more than a hundred years of legal evolution and case law regarding these matters. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-64587687498682649372013-09-09T07:58:41.199+01:002013-09-09T07:58:41.199+01:00I find it perfectly correct that the board poses t...I find it perfectly correct that the board poses the question to the EBA. In this way a (hopefully) clear position may be found that settles such cases in the future.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-47953764754151356872013-09-09T01:08:30.542+01:002013-09-09T01:08:30.542+01:00Does anyone know how English law goes about this?
...Does anyone know how English law goes about this?<br /><br />Suppose a non-existing company appeals some decision (all under UK law). It is noticed immediately that the company does not exist. The appeal is supposedly rejected as inadmissible or something similar to that. Case closed.<br /><br />Some time later, the company is retroactively brought back to life. Does the appeal suddenly become pending again? I would be mildly surprised.<br /><br />In the present case, it was only noticed that the company had ceased to exist after it had been brought back to life, but I'm not convinced it should matter that a formal declaration of inadmissibility had not yet been made.Myshkinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-85162662770392180442013-09-07T23:35:16.437+01:002013-09-07T23:35:16.437+01:00It's not as if bringing dead applications back...It's not as if bringing dead applications back to life is alien to procedure under the EPC: one well-known and well-used example, further processing, is a procedure by which a legally dead application can be resurrected.Ronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-65939767782853530552013-09-07T17:15:19.962+01:002013-09-07T17:15:19.962+01:00It may be a peculiar feature of UK law, but the UK...It may be a peculiar feature of UK law, but the UK is not the only European country to allow such possibilities.<br /><br />Surely under treaties of mutual recognition etc. the EPO should just accept the UK court's decision to deem the company to have never been dissolved and move on?<br /><br />What next?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-2557072599783532312013-09-06T16:38:06.650+01:002013-09-06T16:38:06.650+01:00The EPC was drafted with the intention of, insofar...<i>The EPC was drafted with the intention of, insofar as possible, bringing entitlement out of the jurisdiction of the EPO and leaving it to the national courts, at least so far as applicants are concerned [...]. But the EPO does not seem entirely to be able to stay out of these matters, particularly in relation to opponents and appellants</i>.<br /><br />Which I feel to be something of a double standard.<br />Roufousse T. Fairflynoreply@blogger.com