< Back to latest news & events

News

EPO continues oral proceedings by videoconference in examination and opposition during pendency of referral G 1/21

March 2021

The EPO Boards of Appeal took the decision that from the start of 2021, all Boards of Appeal oral proceedings could be held by videoconference, even if the parties to the proceedings were not in agreement (ostensibly aping the position before Opposition and Examining Divisions).

This decision has been divisive since many believe that holding proceedings by video conference does not give either appellants or respondents the best chance of presenting their case.

On 12 March 2021, Technical Board of Appeal 3.5.02 in appeal case T1807/15 made a referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal seeking to clarify whether, in view of Article 116(1) EPC, oral proceedings may be conducted by videoconference (VICO) without all parties’ consent. The referral concerns appeal proceedings, but also extends to oral proceedings by VICO before examining and opposition divisions.

The following question was referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (G 1/21):

“Is the conduct of oral proceedings in the form of a videoconference compatible with the right to oral proceedings as enshrined in Article 116(1) EPC if not all of the parties to the proceedings have given their consent to the conduct of oral proceedings in the form of a videoconference?”

The Enlarged Board of Appeal will consider the referral on 28 May 2021.

The EPO has today stated that during pendency of the referral, oral proceedings before examining and opposition divisions will continue to be held by VICO as under current practice – that is, without requiring explicit agreement of the parties.  The statement from the EPO does not explicitly mention oral proceedings before the Boards of Appeal however.  It is therefore arguable that the EPO would consider a request for a stay of proceeding in light of the pending referral G 1/12.

This article was prepared by HGF Partner Dr Chris Moore. If you would like further advice on this or any other matter, please contact Chris. Alternatively, you can contact your usual HGF representative or visit our Contact page to get in touch with your nearest HGF office.

Latest updates

The EPO Board of Appeal comments on the scope of the morality exclusion from patentability

The recent decision, T1553/22 of the Board of Appeal required the Board to consider the scope of the exclusions from patentability under Article 53(a) EPC. The invention in this case …

Read article

Thatchers v Aldi: The Fine Line Between Fair Competition and Unfair Advantage

Cider Company Limited v Aldi Stores Limited –  Arnold LJ, Phillips LJ and Falk LJ – [2025] EWCA Civ 5 -– 20 January 2025 Summary The Court of Appeal (CoA) …

Read article

UK IPO Update to AI Patenting Guidelines Highlights Difficulties in Protecting Core AI Inventions

The release by a Chinese company, DeepSeek, of a new open-source reasoning model, has led to falls of hundreds of billions of dollars in US technology stocks including at one …

Read article

UPC stakes claim for wide-reaching long-arm jurisdiction for European patents

Fujifilm Corporation v Kodak GmbH & ors – Thomas J, Dr Thom J and Dr Parchmann J.  – UPC_CFI_355/2023 –  28 January 2025 The Düsseldorf Local Division has delivered the …

Read article

IP Ingredients: The not so "Impossible" Burger

Meat alternatives are a hot topic with the increase in popularity of vegetarianism and veganism, highlighted by this month being “veganuary”.  However, at time when meat alternatives are coming under …

Read article

WTR 1000 2025

We are proud to announce that our European trade mark team has been recognised in the World Trade Mark Review 1000 2025. The firm is also proud to have 19 …

Read article

Court of Appeal Confirms No Second Medical Use SPCs in UK

Merck Serono SA  v  The Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks – Lewison LJ, Arnold LJ and Birss LJ – [2025] EWCA Civ 45 – 28 January 2025 The …

Read article