Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

European Patent Office: Late-filed arguments before the Boards of Appeal

Practitioners before the EPO are aware that EPO proceedings are front-loaded. In effect, all evidence, amendments and arguments should be on file as early as possible in the proceedings. This especially applies to inter-partes proceedings, in which late-filed evidence or amendments could place other parties at a disadvantage.

The front-loading principle before the Boards of Appeal of the EPO is embodied in Article 114(2) EPC, which allows the EPO to disregard "facts or evidence" which are not submitted in due time. Articles 12 and 13 of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal also set limits on the extent and timing of late submissions.

Generally, new facts, documents and evidence would be considered, if the filing was occasioned by an argument or a point raised by another party or in the appealed decision and could not have been filed before under the circumstances of the case. The timing of the filing is also a consideration.

Article 114(2) EPC does not mention late-filed "arguments", and many decisions of the Boards of Appeal interpreted this in a limiting manner (such as T92/92 and G4/92). Under this interpretation, late-filed arguments would always be admissible.

However, the EPO has also recognised that late-filed arguments – even if they are based on the same evidence – can substantially alter a party's case, and may place other parties at a disadvantage, in a similar manner to late-filed evidence.

We have noted a trend in a number of recent decisions from the Technical Boards of Appeal in cases in which the admissibility of late-filed arguments was at issue. In decisions T55/11 and T1621/09, a distinction is made between late-filed arguments which are a merely development of previous argumentation, or which present a completely new case. Arguments which are a development of previous argumentation are likely to be admitted, while arguments which present a completely new case may be rejected. In T1621/09, in particular, the Board applied similar considerations to late-filed arguments as had previously been applied to late-filed evidence: the timing of the arguments, the complexity of the arguments and the impact they might have on other parties to proceedings.

If late-filed arguments are to be admitted before the EPO, it appears therefore that the chances of success are greater if they are a development of previous arguments, rather than completely new arguments.


Edward Farrington

Inspicos P/SKogle Allé 2DK-2970 HoersholmCopenhagen, DenmarkTel: +45 7070 2422Fax: +45 7070

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas has hired former Anand & Anand partner Swati Sharma and hopes to compete with specialist IP firms
Rapporteur-Judge András Kupecz ruled that education and training weren’t legitimate reasons for a member of the public to access documents
Searches for comparison prior art will be a little easier, but practitioners will have to put more thought into claim construction and design patent titles
The Helsinki local division rejected AIM Sport’s request for a preliminary injunction in a dispute with rival Supponor
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The FTC’s plans to scrutinise improperly listed Orange Book patents could make these listings more important in litigation, but firms should be looking at this anyway
Counsel at Debevoise & Plimpton explain how they helped food delivery business Grubhub avoid a preliminary injunction at the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
European lawyers tell Managing IP how the legal market is reacting to the first few months of the UPC and why cases are set to take off
The ban could be extended or cancelled, depending on whether Judge Pauline Newman cooperates with an investigation, the Judicial Council of the Federal Circuit stated
Sources say some China-based lawyers are prepared to take large pay cuts to join stable practices, but most firms are sceptical about new hires