4.3.2 Usage antérieur public
Overview
4.3.2 Usage antérieur public
Bien que les critères applicables en matière de preuve soient les mêmes pour toutes les objections couvertes par l'art. 100 CBE (voir T 270/90, JO 1993, 725), la jurisprudence distingue deux niveaux ou critères de preuve applicables aux objections concernant une utilisation antérieure ayant rendue l'invention accessible au public – soit "l'appréciation des probabilités", soit "la preuve incontestable" selon les cas.
Et sur la charge de la preuve, lire la décision T 2037/18 qui contient des motifs détaillés sur la question (usage antérieur, distinction recevabilité de l'opposition et bien fondé de l'opposition ; charge de l'allégation et charge de la preuve ; principe "negativa non sunt probanda" ; clause de non confidentialité, déplacement de la charge de la preuve) ainsi que la référence à une jurisprudence abondante.
- T 1138/20
Catchword:
1. There is only one standard of proof in the proceedings before the EPO: the deciding body, taking into account the circumstances of the case and the relevant evidence before it, must be convinced that the alleged fact has occurred (see point 1.2.1 of the Reasons). 2. The boards have the power, at any stage of the appeal proceedings, to establish the relevant facts of the case before them and thereby substitute the findings of fact of the departments of first instance. However, the boards have no obligation to establish facts de novo already established by the departments of first instance (see point 1.2.4 of the Reasons). 3. The board's review of a fact-finding process should not be conflated with the review of discretionary decisions within the meaning of the obiter dictum in G 7/93, Reasons 2.6 (see point 1.2.4 (a) of the Reasons).
- Compilation 2023 “Abstracts of decisions”