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 2025

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

The tie-up could result in the firm’s German and France-based teams, which both have strong UPC expertise, becoming independent
News of a slowdown in the UK’s clean energy IP landscape and an EPO report on unitary patent uptake were also among the top talking points
Price hikes at ‘big law’ firms are pushing some clients toward boutiques that offer predictable fees, specialised expertise, and a model built around prioritising IP
The Australian side, in particular, can benefit by capitalising on its independent status to bring in more work from Western countries while still working with its former Chinese partner
Koen Bijvank of Brinkhof and Johannes Heselberger of Bardehle Pagenberg discuss the Amgen v Sanofi case and why it will be cited frequently
View the official winners of the 2025 Social Impact EMEA Awards
King & Wood Mallesons will break into two entities, 14 years after a merger between a Chinese and an Australian firm created the combined outfit
Teams from Shakespeare Martineau and DWF will take centre stage in a dispute concerning the registrability of dairy terminology in plant-based products
Senem Kayahan, attorney and founder at PatentSe, discusses how she divides prosecution tasks, and reveals the importance of empathetic client advice
The association’s Australian group has filed a formal complaint against the choice of venue, citing Dubai as an unsafe environment for the LGBTQIA+ community
Gift this article