German Patent Attorneys forced to go to Holland

A recent decision (T 1012/03) by the Technical Board of Appeal at the European Patent Office may upset some Munich-based patent attorneys by insisting that summoning them to oral proceedings in the EPO's branch at the Hague, rather than at its seat in Munich, is not objectionable under the European Patent Convention.

Right: some helpful information for any lost German patent attorneys.

The IPKat is firmly UK-based and therefore does not care whether he is summoned to Holland or Germany, both being far away places of which he knows little. He is, however, faintly amused by this decision, which runs to 44 pages and is full of detailed semantic arguments, including musings on what is meant by the word "seat" and other erudite legal matters. He is also pleased to see that the EPO is now spreading its workload more evenly across the member states of the convention and looks forward to the day when a branch office is opened in (say) Nottingham.

Things to do in Munich here. Things to see in the Hague here.
German Patent Attorneys forced to go to Holland German Patent Attorneys forced to go to Holland Reviewed by David Pearce on Thursday, May 03, 2007 Rating: 5


  1. David

    EPO in Nottingham? What an excellent idea! Trips to the Olde Trip, the Bell, Royal Children and the Sal.....

  2. The ability of the EPO to summon parties to oral proceedings in Berlin is another matter. Perhaps someone might wish to challenge the EPO is this regard.

  3. I have attended Oral Proceedings at both EPO sites. Rijswijk (The Hague) has the advantage that you are served with excellent free coffee by the staff.

  4. Please don't challenge the right to hold Oral Proceedings in Berlin. It's a nice city which I'd like the chance to see more of and the EPO buildings there are gorgeous.

    Personally, however, I'm eagerly awaiting my first summons to Vienna...


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.