8.3.1 Checking the identity and authorisations of participants at oral proceedings 

The division will check the ID document of one representative or authorised employee of each party unless this person is personally known. For other representatives, authorised employees and accompanying persons (including those who will be making oral submissions, see E‑III, 8.5) present for a given party, it is sufficient that their identity is confirmed orally by the person whose ID documents were checked or who is personally known to at least one member of the division. This applies independently of whether a representative is a professional representative or a legal practitioner. Equally, if a party is not represented but personally present together with an accompanying person, it is sufficient to check the ID document of that party.

However, the division checks the ID documents of all parties, witnesses and experts summoned to give evidence before the EPO. Moreover, the division may check ID documents of other attendees where this is considered necessary, e.g. because the identity of an accompanying person is challenged by another party or where the division has serious doubts about the identity of the person.

The identity document may be presented in one of following ways:

– If the identity document is an EPO badge, by showing it to the camera at the beginning of the videoconference in the public meeting room. 

– If the identity document is a national ID card or passport, by showing it to a member of the division in a separate non-public meeting room. 

–  By sending a copy to the email address provided to the parties at the beginning of the oral proceedings. 

– By using the EPO online filing options up to two days prior to the oral proceedings. 

For data protection reasons, copies of identification documents sent by email are deleted and not included in the file; copies submitted via the EPO online filing options are placed in the non-public part of the file.

In order for the division to be able to confirm the identity of the person concerned, the full name (first name and surname) and the picture of the ID should be visible. All the other information on the identity document can be kept hidden if so wished, as long as it is possible to recognise that it is an official identity document.

Professional representatives need to file authorisations only in exceptional cases (see the decision of the President of the EPO dated 12 July 2007, Special edition No. 3, OJ EPO 2007, L.1).

Authorisations need be checked only if a party is represented by a person whose authorisation is not apparent from the file. If it is established that the person is either

(i)a professional representative acting under a sub-authorisation 

(ii)a professional representative from the same agency as the representative acting in the case, or 

(iii)a natural person (e.g. executive director) authorised by law in the party's country of business to act on behalf of that party 

then no further check is required.

If however the person is:

(a)a professional representative who is neither from the same agency nor acting under a sub-authorisation, and his/her attendance at the oral proceedings is his/her first appearance in the procedure, or 

(b)a legal practitioner or a party's employee who is not an authorised professional representative 

then the procedure is as follows:

In case (a), the division will check the file to see whether the previous representative's authorisation has lapsed. A change in representative or the termination of the authorisation of a previous representative may have been effected via an electronic notification through the My Files service (see OJ EPO 2012, 352). If the previous representative's authorisation has lapsed, no further action is required. If not, the representative concerned will be requested to provide a reference to a registered general authorisation or to file an individual authorisation.

In case (b), the division will request the person concerned to provide a reference to a registered general authorisation or to file – by email in the case of oral proceedings by videoconference (OJ EPO 2020, A71) – an individual authorisation.

Any person without an authorisation will be requested to submit one without delay. If they are unable to do so straight away, a time limit of two months will be set for its submission. The fact that the authorisation was missing, and the time limit set for submitting it, must be recorded in the minutes. The proceedings then continue in the normal way, except that no decision can be pronounced at the end. Instead, the decision is issued in writing once the missing authorisation has been filed. At the end of the proceedings, the party concerned must be reminded to file the authorisation.