3. Transfer of the European patent application 

A European patent application may be transferred for one or more of the designated contracting states.

Art. 72 is an autonomous provision which exclusively governs the formal requirements of such transfers. The EPO registers a transfer of rights in respect of a pending European patent application (see A‑IV, 1.1.1 and J 10/93) in the European Patent Register on request, upon fulfilment of the prerequisites of Rule 22. The request is not deemed to have been filed until an administrative fee has been paid. The amount of the fee is determined by the latest schedule of fees and expenses of the EPO (see epo.org).

Where the request relates to multiple applications, a separate fee has to be paid for each application.

Rule 22 furthermore requires the production of documents providing evidence of such a transfer. Any kind of written evidence suitable for proving the transfer is admissible. This includes formal documentary proof such as the instrument of transfer itself (the original or a copy thereof) or other official documents or extracts thereof, provided that they immediately verify the transfer (J 12/00). Art. 72 requires that, for an assignment, the signatures of the parties appear on the documents submitted as evidence of the transfer. Assignment documents filed electronically (see A‑II, 1.2.2) may, instead of handwritten signatures, bear qualified electronic signatures (see notice from the EPO dated 22 October 2021; OJ EPO 2021, A86).

Where a document is signed on behalf of a legal person, only such persons as are entitled to sign by law, by the legal person's articles of association or equivalent or by a special mandate may do so. National law applies in that respect. In all cases, an indication of the signatory's entitlement to sign, e.g. his/her position within the legal entity where the entitlement to sign results directly from such a position, is to be given. The EPO reserves the right to request documentary proof of the signatory's authority to sign if the circumstances of a particular case necessitate this. Where the entitlement results from a special authorisation, this authorisation (a copy thereof, which need not be certified) has to be submitted in every case. The EPO will in particular examine whether the signatory is empowered to enter into a legally binding contract on behalf of the legal entity. As a general rule, the authorisation to represent a party in proceedings before the EPO within the meaning of Rule 152 EPC, be it an individual or a general authorisation, is not as such considered to empower the representative to enter into such a contract.

If the evidence presented is found to be unsatisfactory, the EPO informs the party requesting the transfer accordingly, and invites it to remedy the stated deficiencies within a given time limit.

If the request complies with the requirements of Rule 22(1), the transfer is registered with the date on which the request, the required evidence or the fee has been received by the EPO, whichever is the latest. In case of a minor deficiency, i.e. if all requirements were present but not fulfilled completely (e.g. the request was signed but the name and/or position of the person signing were missing), once rectified the effective date is the date of receipt of the original request for registration.

On the above date, the transfer becomes effective vis-à-vis the EPO, i.e. from that date the newly registered applicant is entitled to exercise the right to the European patent application in proceedings before the EPO (Art. 60(3)). If the transfer was for certain designated states only, Art. 118 applies.

Once a transfer has been duly entered in the European Patent Register, the registration cannot be undone, even if it appears that one or more requirements were actually not fulfilled for reasons not apparent at the time when the transfer was registered by the EPO, e.g. where doubts arise later as to the entitlement of the person signing on behalf of one of the parties to enter such a transfer agreement (see decisions J 16/14 to J 22/14). The original status quo is no longer restored until the valid legal situation has been established. In the meantime, proceedings may have to be stayed under Rule 14 or 78 until it is clear who the legitimate applicant/proprietor is.