Key points
- The Board: "The appellant shall bear the costs incurred by the respondent for the preparation of the oral proceedings, namely fourteen hours' preparation time for the authorised representative."
- "On 9 December 2021, the day before the scheduled date, in an electronic letter that was received at 16:34, the appellant informed the board that it would not be participating in the oral proceedings and requested that a decision be taken on the basis of the state of the file. No reason was given for this change of mind. " "Furthermore, the appellant did not inform the respondent."
- "As noted by the respondent, the board's preliminary opinion on the case was wholly positive in favour of the respondent. None of the appellant's objections was considered convincing, and the opinion was expressed that the appeal would be dismissed. "
- "in the absence of any indication from the appellant that it was not continuing to argue the case, it was necessary for the proprietor's representative, as well as for the board, to spend time properly preparing for the oral proceedings immediately before they took place. It is noted that the respondent had raised numerous lines of attack in its grounds of appeal, referring to multiple documents. Therefore a considerable effort was required to prepare for the case properly. "
- " It is therefore clear that the appellant's conduct resulted in an inefficient use of the time of both the respondent and the board. "
- "In these circumstances an apportionment of costs in favour of the respondent is appropriate under Article 104(1) EPC and Article 16(1)(c) RPBA."
EPO T 1310/18
The link to the decision is provided after the jump, as well as (an extract of) the text of the decision.
source http://justpatentlaw.blogspot.com/2022/03/t-131018-apportionment-of-costs.html
