EPO: The EPO moves further towards oral proceedings via video conference

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

EPO: The EPO moves further towards oral proceedings via video conference

Sponsored by

inspicos-400px recrop.jpg
Photo of white blank screen laptop, black coffee cup and coasters on the wooden working desk over blurred modern cafe background.

At the beginning of 1998, the EPO began allowing oral proceedings to be held as a video conference (OJ EPO 1997, 572). Video conferencing was only available for oral proceedings held before an examining division, i.e. prior to grant of the European patent. Oral proceedings before examining divisions are more suited to video conferencing as they are usually shorter and less complex than opposition oral proceedings, they are not open to the public, and only one party is present (the patent applicant).

Until now, there has not been an opportunity for oral proceedings to be held before the opposition division. However, in a Notice from the EPO dated April 14 2020, the EPO announced a pilot project in which oral proceedings could take place via video conference before opposition divisions.

Many of the requirements in the Notice for requesting and arranging oral proceedings via video conference in opposition proceedings remain the same as those established for examination oral proceedings. However, opposition oral proceedings will not be held via video conference if witnesses are to be heard, or if simultaneous interpretation between the official EPO languages is needed.

The pilot project allows examiners, parties to the proceedings and their representatives to participate from different locations. Exchange of written documents is to take place via email. Any technical problems which mean that parties cannot be adequately represented may result in a new summons to oral proceedings being issued.

Opposition oral proceedings are generally open to the public, according to Article 116(4) EPC. This, of course, poses issues when oral proceedings are held via video conference. The EPO will allow members of the public to watch opposition oral proceedings via a video link to a dedicated room at the EPO's offices. The opportunity will also be given for members of the public to connect to the video conference remotely. It remains to be seen whether these solutions are acceptable for those wishing to observe opposition oral proceedings.

This pilot project started on May 4 2020 and is due to run until April 30 2021.

Edward Farrington

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

VO, which has offices in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany, is the second European IP firm to secure external backing this week
The Bardehle Pagenberg attorneys-at-law discuss the firm’s Managing IP EMEA Awards 2026 success, Unified Patent Court litigation strategy, and evolving European patent trends
A patent battle between two legal tech companies and a loss for Elon Musk’s xAI against OpenAI were also among the top talking points
With drug prices a hot topic in the US, courts are seemingly more reluctant to prevent the entry of generics to the market
Academic Eden Sarid joins us during Pride Month to discuss queer expression and IP law, Patagonia v Pattie Gonia, and how queer and AI-generated creations both pose novelty concerns
Patent attorney Michael Henson joins the firm to lead its freshly launched blockchain and digital assets practice
A dispute over mammogram technology, and a development in the case between GSK and Moderna were also among the top talking points in recent weeks
With rankings for Western Europe set to be published on June 25, we sat down with our research lead to find out what practitioners and law firms can expect
Peter O’Sullivan, a professional services executive, says he is looking forward to helping Pearce IP become the leading life sciences firm in Australia and New Zealand
Matteo Di Lernia, advocate at LCA Studio Legale, unpicks the CJEU’s ruling in M.M. Ristorazione v Villa Ramazzini, including its impact on litigation strategies
Gift this article