| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1998:T039194.19980121 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 21 January 1998 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0391/94 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 84112037.1 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C04B 35/04 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | C | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Magnesia clinker and method of producing the same | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Shin Nihon Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Shell Internationale Research Maatschappij B.V. Radex-Heraklith Industriebeteiligungs AG Premier Periclase Ltd Didier-Werke AG |
||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.05 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Proprietor's request for revocation of the patent | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. An interlocutory decision of the Opposition Division concerning maintenance of the European patent No. 0 140 221 in amended form was posted on 7 March 1994.
II. The Appellants (Opponents 02, 03 and 04) appealed against this decision by letters filed on 3 May 1994, 3. May 1994 and 11 May 1994, respectively, paid the fee for appeal within the time limit and filed a Statement of Grounds of Appeal on 14 July 1994, 7 July 1994 and 15. July 1994, respectively. They requested that the patent be revoked.
III. In a letter dated 21 January 1998 the Respondent (Proprietor) requested revocation of the patent.
Reasons for the Decision
1. The appeals comply with Articles 106 to 108 and Rule 64 EPC and are admissible.
2. It folllows from the provision according to Article 113(2) EPC that a European patent cannot be maintained against the Proprietor's will. Thus, in view of the Respondent's request for revocation of his patent, the present European patent has to be revoked (cf. T 73/84; OJ EPO 1985, 241).
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The European patent No. 0 140 221 is revoked.
