tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post9083180786828688212..comments2024-03-29T06:00:27.896+00:00Comments on The IPKat: EPO responds to accusations of perceived bias in G1/21 (ViCo oral proceedings)Verónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-20612749028865852642021-05-27T17:16:03.168+01:002021-05-27T17:16:03.168+01:00As I have commented elsewhere, this indicates to m...As I have commented elsewhere, this indicates to me either that Mr Josefsson does not understand the legal principles underpinning the independence of the judiciary or, more likely, a desire on his part to continue as Chair of the EBA despite the obvious problems of partiality (ie where he would be effectively deciding whether his own actions were in accordance with the EPC). Neither is a good look for the President of the Boards of Appeal.<br /><br />One could even speculate that his objective could have been to (carefully) select the other members of the EBA that he felt were less likely to be removed from the panel. It is hard to know for sure whether this was a motivation for not Mr Josefsson deciding not to self-recuse. On the other hand, it is also impossible to rule it out as a motive ... which has obvious implications for the perception of impartiality of the other members that he appointed to the EBA (or, viewed another way, the lawfulness of the decisions that he took in connection with G 1/21, including with regard to the composition of the EBA).Concerned observernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-54955708523593579582021-05-26T10:53:59.702+01:002021-05-26T10:53:59.702+01:00This is the problem. It beggars belief that Mr Jos...This is the problem. It beggars belief that Mr Josefsson thought it might be appropriate for him to sit on the board in this case. The decision has already been made.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-49804062054078197222021-05-25T18:50:14.438+01:002021-05-25T18:50:14.438+01:00It shouldn't have taken all that fuss for them...It shouldn't have taken all that fuss for them to realise the non-impartiality situation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-8655055721100347842021-05-25T17:56:18.265+01:002021-05-25T17:56:18.265+01:00... and the opponent responds (in a letter dated 2...... and the opponent responds (in a letter dated 24 May 2021) to the EBA's interlocutory decision:<br />https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP04758381&lng=en&tab=doclist<br /><br />It will be very interesting to see how the EBA proceeds from here. Not only has the opponent not (explicitly) consented to the use of VICO for oral proceedings before the EBA, but they have requested postponement of the proceedings scheduled for 28 May AND raised further objections to the composition of the EBA.<br /><br />Whilst I do not find all of the opponent's new objections to be compelling, it seems to me that there is enough substance to their complaints to justify the EBA taking extraordinary measures to guarantee the (perception of) their independence for this case. It remains to be seen whether the EBA will take the bait ... though if they do not, then the persistence of objectively justifiable fears about the partiality of certain members of the EBA will cast a dark cloud over the public's perception of the independence of the EBA.Proof of the puddingnoreply@blogger.com