7.3. Withdrawal of the appeal
7.3.2 Board's powers to decide on issues after withdrawal of the appeal
If the sole appellant says he has withdrawn his appeal, but the parties are in dispute as to whether he did so admissibly, then the board is empowered to rule on that issue (T 659/92, OJ 1995, 519).
After withdrawal of an appeal it is still permissible to decide on ancillary questions (T 85/84). Thus in J 12/86 (OJ 1988, 83), T 41/82 (OJ 1982, 256) and T 773/91, the board of appeal dealt with requests for reimbursement of the appeal fee filed after withdrawal of the appeal, and in T 117/86 (OJ 1989, 401), T 323/89 (OJ 1992, 169), T 614/89 and T 765/89 with requests for apportionment of costs.
In T 333/20, the board observed that a withdrawal of the appeal brought the proceedings to a close as regards the substantive merits of the appeal case itself but not as regards requests relating to issues not settled by the withdrawal. The request for reimbursement of the appeal fee filed by the appellant on withdrawing the appeal was therefore not covered by the closure of the proceedings (see T 41/82, OJ 1982, 256; T 89/84, OJ 1984, 562; J 12/86, OJ 1988, 83; T 773/91 and J 37/97).
- T 433/21
Catchword:
1. Neither the omission of a procedural act nor an error caused by miscommunication between the applicant and the representative or by an incorrect recollection of the applicant's instructions can be regarded as an error under Rule 139 EPC, provided that the document filed with the EPO is deemed to express the representative's intention at the time of filing. 2. A request for correction of a declaration of withdrawal of an appeal under Rule 139 EPC does not reopen the appeal proceedings, but only starts ancillary proceedings to decide whether the appeal proceedings should be reopened.
- 2023 compilation “Abstracts of decisions”