Art134eTPEPC1973

Métadonnées

• Nom affiché : Art134eTPEPC1973
• Numéro d'article : 134
• Dossier / langue : English
• Tag langue : #English
• PDF original : Articles/English/Articles 126-150/Article 134 (English version)/Art134eTPEPC1973.pdf

Comment:

The collection represents purely an internal research tool for the purpose of Directorate Patent Law of the European Patent Office. No guarantee can be given for its completeness or correctness. The documents produced before 1969 cannot be provided in English as this was not an official language in the period before that date. These documents therefore are provided in French and German.

Page 2

Art. 134 MPÜ Zugelassene Vertreter

Entwurf, der dem nebenstehenden Dokument zugrundeliegt	Art. Nr. im Entwurf/ Dokument	Dokument in dem der Art. behandelt wird	Fundstelle im Dokument
Vorschl.d.Vors.	159	IV/215/62	S.36-39
IV/215/62	159	IV/3076/62	S. 161
VE Mai 1962	169	6551/IV/62	S. 40
VE 1962	171	1699/IV/63	S. 20
VE 1962 (Ue)	171	BR/49/70	Rdn. 41-48
BR/70/70	152	BR/94/71	Rdn. 80 w)
VE 1971 (Ue)	153	BR/169/72	Rdn. 150-160
VE 1971 (Ue)	153	BR/177/72	Rdn. 91
VE 1971 (Ue)	153	BR/144/71	Rdn. 28
VE 1971 (Ue)	153	BR/132/71	Rdn. 67
BR/88/71	152	BR/125/71	Rdn. 81/82
BR/184/72	132	BR/209/72	Rdn. 46-59
BR/199/72	133	BR/219/72	Rdn. 51

Dokumente der MDK

E 1972 (M/1)	134	M/PR/I	S. 59-7265-69
		M/PR/G	S. 203 187-188
		M/11	S. 56; 68
		M/15	S. 108 - 118; vgl. vorgesch1. R 108, S. 114
		M/20	S. 208+210
		M/21	S. 220
		M/22	S. 264+266

Page 3

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 4 October 1973 M/160/K Original: English/French/German

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn up by: General Drafting Committee

Subject: Amendments to the texts of document. M/146/R 1 to 15

Page 4

(6) Professional representation in proceedings established by this Convention may also be undertaken, in the same way as by a professional representative, by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States and having his place of business within such State, to the extent that he is entitled, within the said State, to act as a professional representative in patent matters. Paragraph 5 shall apply mutatis mutandis. (7) The Administrative Council may adopt provisions governing: (a) the qualifications and training required of a person for admission to the European qualifying examination and the conduct of such examination; (b) the establishment or recognition of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives by virtue of either the European qualifying examination or the provisions of Article 163, paragraph 7; and (c) any disciplinary power to be exercised by that institute or the European Patent Office on such persons.

Page 5

(1) Professional representation of natural or legal persons in proceedings established by this Convention may only be undertaken by professional representatives whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the European Patent Office. (2) Any natural person who fulfils the following conditions may be entered on the list of professional representatives: (a) he must be a national of one of the Contracting States; (b) he must have his place of business or employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States; (c) he must have passed the European qualifying examination. (3) Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the conditions laid down in paragraph 2 are fulfilled. (4) Persons whose names appear on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to act in all proceedings established by this Convention. (5) For the purpose of acting as a professional representative, any person whose name appears on the list referred to in paragraph 1 shall be entitled to establish a place of business in any Contracting State in which proceedings established by this Convention may be conducted, having regard to the Protocol on Centralisation annexed to this Convention. The authorities of such State may remove that entitlement in individual cases only in application of legal provisions adopted for the purpose of protecting public security and law and order. Before such action is taken, the President of the European Patent Office shall be consulted. (6) The President of the European Patent Office may, in special circumstances, grant exemption from the requirement of paragraph 2(a).

Page 6

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 30 September 1973 M/ 146/R 5 Original: English/French/German

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn up by: General Drafting Committee

Subject: Convention: Articles 112 to 139

Page 7

(5) Professional representation in proceedings established by this Convention may also be undertaken, in the same way as by a professione representative, by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States and having his place of business within suck State, to the extent that he is entitled, within the said State, to act as a professional representative in patent matters. Paragraph 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis. (7) The Administrative Council may adopt provisions governing: (a) the qualifications and training required of a person for admission to the European qualifying examination and the conduct of such examination; (b) the establishment or recognition of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives by virtue of either the European qualifying examination or the provisions of Article 152, paragraph 7; and (c) any disciplinary power to be exercised by that institute or the European Patent Office on such persons.

Page 8

Article 134

Professional representatives

(1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings established by this Convention may only be undertaken by professional representatives whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the European Patent Office. (2) Unchanged from 1972 published text. (b) Only concerns French text. (c) Unchanged from 1972 published text. (2a) Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the above conditions are fulfilled. (3) Persons whose names appear on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to act in all proceedings established by this Convention. (4) For the purpose of acting as a professional representative, any person whose name appears on the list referred to in paragraph 1 shall be entitled to establish a place of business in any Contracting State in which proceedings established by this Convention may be conducted, having regard to the Protocol on the Centralisation of the European Patent System and on its. Introduction. The authorities of the host country may remove that entitlement in individual cases in application of legal provisions adopted for the purpose of protecting public security and law and order. Before such action is taken, the President of the European Patent Office shall be consulted. (5) Unchanged from 1972 published text.

Page 9

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 27 September 1973 M/141/I/R 12 Original: English/French/German

TEXTS DRAWN UP BY THE DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF MAIN COMMITTEE I AT THE MEETING ON 27 SEPTEMBER 1973

Articles of the Convention: Articles 81 113 134

Implementing Regulations: Rules 38 54 58 61 63 67

Page 10

Article 134 (continued) (6) Professional representation in proceedings established by this Convention may also be undertaken, in the same way as by a professional representative, by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States and having his place of business within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a professional representative in patent matters. Paragraph 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis. (7) The Administrative Council may adopt provisions governing: (a) the qualifications and training required of a person for admission to the European qualifying examination and the conduct of such examination; (b) the establishment or recognition of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives by virtue of either the European qualifying examination or the provisions of Article 162, paragraph 7; and (c) any disciplinary power to be exercised by that institute or the European Patent Office on such persons.

Page 11

Article 134 Professional representatives (1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings established by this Convention may only be undertaken by professional representatives whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the European Patent Office. (2) .} Unchanged from 1972 published text. (a) } (b) Only concerns French text. (c) Unchanged from 1972 published text.

Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the above conditions are fulfilled. (3) Persons whose names appear on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to act in all proceedings established by this Convention. (4) For the purpose of acting as a professional representative, any person whose name appears on the list referred to in paragraph 1 shall be entitled to establish a place of business ir any Contracting State in which proceedings established by this Convention may be conducted, having regard to the Protocol on the Centralisation of the European Patent System and on its Introduction. The authorities of the host country may remove that entitlement in individual cases only in application of legal provisions adopted for the purpose of protecting public security and law and order. Before such action is taken, the President of the European Patent Office shall be consulted. (5) Unchanged from 1972 published text.

Page 12

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 27 September 1973

M/ 136/I/R 10

Original: English/French/German

TEXTS DRAWN UP BY THE DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF MAIN COMMITTEE I AT THE MEETING ON 26 SEPTEMBER 1973

Articles of the Convention:

Articles 14 52 79 89 90 91 95 101 105 121 124 133 134 148 150 151 152 153 153a 154 155 156 157 161

Page 13

Article 134 (continued)

(7) The Administrative Council may adopt provisions governing:

(a) the qualifications and training required of a person for admission to the European qualifying examination and the conduct of such examination;

(b) the establishment or recognition of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives by virtue of either the European qualifying examination or the provisions of Article 162, paragraph 7; and

(c) any disciplinary power to be exercised by that institute or the European Patent Office on such persons.

M/126/I/R 9 gc

Page 14

Article 134 Professional representatives (1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings established by this Convention may only be undertaken by professional representatives whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the European Patent Office. (2) (a) { Unchanged from 1972 published text. (b) Only concerns French text. (c) Unchanged from 1972 published text.

Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the above conditions are fulfilled. (3) Persons whose names appear on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to act in all proceedings estelished by this Convention. (4) For the purpose of acting as a professional representative, any person whose name appears on the list referred to in paragraph 1 shall be entitled to establish a place of business in any Contracting State in which proceedings established by this Convention may be conducted, having regard to the Protocol on the Centralisation of the European Patent System and on its Introduction. (5) Unchanged from 1972 publisher text. (6) Professional representation in proceedings established by this Convention may also be undertaken, in the same way as by a professional representative, by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States and having his place of business within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a professional representative in patent matters. Paragraph 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Page 15

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 24 September 1973

M/ 126/I/R 9

Original English/Trench/German

TEXTS DRAWN UP BY THE DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF MAIN COMMITTEE I AT THE MEETING ON 22 SEPTEMBER 1973

Articles of the Convention:

Article 14 Article 133 Article 134

Rules of the Implementing Regulations:

Rule 26 Rule 51 Rule 56 Rule 69 Rule 76 Rule 79 Rule 93 Rule 95

Draft Protocol on the Recognition of Decisions in respect of the Right to the Grant of a European Patent:

Article 2

Page 16

It is proposed to add the following second and third sentences to paragraph 4: (4)

The powers of the authorities of the host State to close a place of business pursuant to the legal provisions relating to puolic safety and "ordre public", shall not be affected. Before such a measure is taken, the Fresicert of the European Patent Office shall be consulted.

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Wunich, 22 September 1973 M/125/I Original: German

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn up by: German delegation Subject: Proposal for Article 134, paragraph 4

Page 18

Article 134 Professional representatives (8)(new) If a person who has established a place of business in another Contracting State in accordance with paragraph 4 or paragraph 6, repeatedly or seriously infringes the laws of the host State, the President of the European Patent Office shall be authorised to deprive such person, at the request of the authorities of the host State, of the right to establish a place of business in that State.

Article 105 Decisions subject to appeal (1) An appeal shall lie from decisions of the Receiving Section, Examining Divisions and Opposition Divisions and of the President of the European Patent Office under Article 134, paragraph 8. It shall have suspensive effect. (1a) } Unchanged from 1 / 109 / I / R / 5 (2) } Unchanged from 1972 published text

Page 19

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 21 September 1973

M/122/I

Original: German

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn up by: German delegation

Subject: Article 134, paragraph 8(new) and Article 105 of the Convention

Page 20

The delegations of the three organisations have jointly reviewed the question of representation before the European Patent Office and have extracted the following simplified recommendations from their previous comments.

Article 133, paragraph 2:

Natural and legal persons not having their residence or their seat within the territory ... (continue as present text).

Article 133, paragraph 3:

Natural and legal persons having their residence or their seat within the territory ... (continue as present text).

Article 134:

Add a new paragraph:

"All provisions of this Article and Article 133 regarding proceedings before the European Patent Office shall also apply to proceedings in the matter of European patent applications before any national office which conduct examination and/or search on behalf of the European Patent Office. Paragraph 4 of this Article shall also apply to Contracting States in which such national offices are located."

Article 165, paragraph 1:

Add a first condition as follows:

"(a) and (b) shall be a national of one of the Contracting States' three-index present conditions (a) and (b) as (b) and (c) respectively."

Page 21

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 20 September 1973

M/115/I

Original: English/French/German

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn on by: CNIPA, FICPI and UNEPA

Subject: Joint recommendation for Articles 133, 134 and 162 of the Convention and for Rule 107 of the Implementing Regulations

Page 22

Article 134 (continued) (4) Any person whose name appears on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to establish a place of business in the Federal Republic of Germany, the Netherlands and in any Contracting State benefiting from the provisions of the Protocol on the Centralisation of the European Patent Office and on its Introduction, for the period during which these provisions apply, for the purpose of acting as a professional representative in proceedings before the European Patent Office. Professional representatives, their associates, assistants and employees shall have the unrestricted right to reside with their families and exercise their profession within the said States. (5) Unchanged (6) Professional representation before the European Patent Office, on the same basis as a professional representative, may also ... (the rest remaining unchanged). (7) Unchanged

Article 162 Professional representatives during a transitional period (1) During a transitional period, the expiry of which shall be determined by the Administrative Council, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 134, paragraph 2, any natural person who fulfils the following conditions may be entered on the list of professional representatives: (a) he must be a national of one of the Contracting States; (b) he must have his place of business or place of employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States;

Page 23

The amendments to the Convention and to the Implementing Regulations proposed below are underlined or indicated by (....) according as they represent a new wording or deletions vis-à-vis the text in M / 1 and M / 2.

CONVENTION

Article 133 Representation (1) Unchanged (2) Does not concern English text (3) Does not concern English text (4) Unchanged

Article 134 Professional representatives (1) Unchanged (2) Unchanged (3) Persons whose names appear on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to act before all departments of and in all proceedings before the European Patent Office.

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 20 September 1973 M / 112 / I Original: French

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn up by: French delegation Subject: Representation - Articles 133, 134 and 162 Rules 103 and 107

Page 25

Grounds: The principle defined in Article 93(2) excludes the system of "delayed examination". Care has, however, to be taken not to create a "back-door" through which the said system can enter.

The Comment of CPCCI M/18 12 cannot be endorsed; neither the Administrative Counsel nor the Applicant should be permitted to introduce "delayed examination".

6. Article 133 Paragraphs 2 and 3

Proposal: That the Suggestion M/21 UNEPA under 13 be altered to the following proposal: "Natural persons not having a place of residence within the territory of one of the Contracting States, and legal persons not having a registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States ....."

That the Suggestion M/21 UNEPA under 14 be altered to the following proposal: "Natural persons having a residence within the territory of one of the Contracting States, and legal persons having a registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States, can in ......"

Grounds: The term "place of residence" is clearer than that in the Suggestion M/21. It corresponds with the text of the Draft.

7. Article 134

The Proposal of Comment M/11 of the Federal Republic of Germany, that No. 6 of Article 134, supplemented by the following paragraph 8: "If a person whose name appears on the list of professional representatives repeatedly or seriously infringes the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany or of the Netherlands, the competent authorities of these States shall be authorised, after consulting the President of the European Patent Office, to deprive such person of the right to establish a place of business pursuant to paragraph 4 ", is supported.

Page 26

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 11 September 1973 M/62/I/II Original: German/English/French

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn up by : Union of European Patent Agents (UNEPA)

Subject : Additional comments

Page 27

after the date of priority be inspected on request, subject to the exceptions provided for in the Implementing Regulations.

The corresponding amendments should be made in paragraphs 2, 3 and 5 .

Article 134

8. There seem to be no strong reasons for requiring that professional representatives must be nationals of the Contracting States. Thus paragraphs 2 (a) and 5 should be deleted.

Article 138

9. The present wording of paragraph 2 seems to allow that during revocations proceedings and if national law so provides, claims in a patent can be substituted for new claims based on the content of the description and the drawings. Such new claims have not been examined by the EPO nor is it within the competence of national courts to examine such claims. This is not a satisfactory solution. Furthermore this way of limiting a patent leads to unsecurity for third parties regarding the scope of patents.

The last sentece of paragraph 2 should therefore be substituted by the following. "Such a limitation shall as regards the patent claims be restricted to the deletion of one or more claims."

Rule 85

10. The period of four months seems to be rather short. It is too short in respect of applicants in distant countries or those with none of the working languages at the EPO as an official language. For instance the communications between the EPO and such applicants involves translations in two directions.

We therefore propose the upper limit in rule 85 to be amended to six months.

Page 28

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 10 September 1973 M/53/I/II Original: English

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn up by: Swedish delegation Subject : Proposals for amendments to the draft texts

Page 29

FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DES CONSEILS EN PROPRIETE INDUSTRIELLE COMMISSION D'ETUDE ET DE TRAVAIL

Circulation date: August 9, 1973.

DRAFT

MEMORANDUM A

on

Representation before the European Patent Office for presentation to the Munich Diplomatic Conference.

A. Proposals of the UNICE and the CIFE in respect of Art. 162 (1) (b) and 162 (3).

The main feature of the proposal of the UNICE and the CIFE for an amended version of Art. 162 is that they have transferred the word "agir" from the official text of Art. 133 (3) (French version), dealing with the instances where representation by a person on the list of Art. 134 is not required, to Art. 162 dealing with persons on that list. In the English translation furnished by the CIFE, the word "act" is used for "agir". In the German translation not furnished by either of the organizations, the word "auftreten" is used, but it can be taken for granted that this is intended to have the same significance as the word "handeln" used in the official text of Art. 133 (3), thus referring to the instances where representation by a person on the list of Art. 134 is not required. Also the word "act" used in the English translation of the UNICE-CIFE proposal will therefore be taken to have that significance.

The declared purpose of the amendment is, according to M/22, point 44, second paragraph, pages 266-7, to obtain a clarification which only concerns those countries where the choice of representative is free. It is doubtful, however, whether the amendment is in fact so limited, or will also extend to countries where the choice of representative is not free, i.e. where there are regulations governing representation. That will be the case if "acting" is to be interpreted as including "acting on behalf of an employer, and nobody else" (and if that is not the intended interpretation, what else could it be?).

It should not be forgotten that there are countries having regulations governing representation but where an employee can nevertheless always act on behalf of his employer. Examples of such countries are Germany and Austria, and there may be others. Now, if "acting" is to be understood as stated above, the condition of Art. 162 (1) (b) as formulated by the UNICE and the CIFE will be fulfilled by the whole population of Germany and Austria, and Art. 162 (3) will apply to these countries with no consideration whatsoever for the national rules governing representation. That is against the declared intention of the CIFE and would

FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DES CONSEILS EN PROPRIETE INDUSTRIELLE

re: Munich Diplomatic Conference September lo to October 6, 1973.

Attached are: Memorandum A on representation before the European Patent Office, Art. 133, 134, 144, 162, Rules 103, 107.

Memorandum B on evidence of transfer of the inventor's right, Art. 58, 79, 90, Rules 14, 42.

Memorandum C on multiple priorities and partial priorities, Art. 86.

Memorandum D on withdrawal of the European patent application, Art. 58, Rules 14, 49.

Memorandum E on extension of periods, Rule 85, as related to language problems, Art. 14 (4) and Rule 6 (2).

Page 31

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 10 September 1973

M/ 48/I

Original: English/French/Nerman

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drewn up by: FICPI

Subject: Memoranda on:

- representation - evidence of transfer of the inventor's right - multiple priorities and partial priorities - withdrawal of the European patent application - extension of periods as related to language problems

Page 32

43. Article 134

Text for the proposal by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany in M/11, No. 6: "(7) .... of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives on the basis of the European qualifying examination or, pursuant to Article 162, paragraph 7, without having taken that examination and any ...." "(8 new) If a person whose name appears on the list of professional representatives, and who has established a place of business in the Federal Republic of Germany or the Netherlands pursuant to paragraph 4 , repeatedly or seriously infringes ...." 44. Article 149

If the Netherlands proposal in M/32, No. 22, is adopted: "(2) .... shall apply if the applicant has indicated in the international application that he wishes to obtain a European patent for one or more of the designated States of the group. The same shall apply if the applicant designates in the international application one of the Contracting States in the group, whose national law provides that the designation of that State shall have the effect of the application being for a European patent." 45. Article 153 (only concerns German text)

Page 33

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- 1973 -

Munich, 10 September 1973

M/47/I/II/III

Original: German

CONFERENCE DOCUMENT

Drawn up by: The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany

Subject: Proposals for amendments to the draft texts

Page 34

Das Beschwerdeverfahren sollte in zwei Phasen abgewickelt werden können; in einer ersten Phase, in der die förmliche Beschwerde innerhalb von zwei Monaten eingelegt werden muß, und einer zweiten Phase, in der die Beschwerde innerhalb von höchstens sechs Monaten zu begründen ist.

29 Artikel 120 Absatz 2 (Der FEMIPI führt diesen Artikel lediglich als Beispiel an)

Der FEMIPI empfiehlt eindringlich, daß die im Verfahren vorgeschriebenen Fristen - wie beispielsweise die Frist nach Artikel 120 Absatz 2 - mindestens zwei Monate betragen.

30 Artikel 128 Absatz 5

Zu den Auskünften, die Dritten vor der Veröffentlichung erteilt werden können, sollten gegebenenfalls auch die Angabe der Priorität und des PCTUrsprungs der Anmeldung gehören.

31 Artikel 130 und 131

Nach Ansicht des FEMIPI sollte sich die Erteilung von Auskünften an nationale Patentämter von Nichtvertragsstaaten keinesfalls auf Sachangaben erstrecken.

Ferner sollten die betreffenden Stellen ohne Rücksicht auf die Gründe bei diesen Auskunftserteilungen und sonstigen Mitteilungen den Grundsatz der Geheimhaltung im Interesse des Anmelders beachten.

32 Artikel 133, 134 und 162 Die Stellungnahmen, Bemerkungen und Vorschläge des FEMIPI zu diesen Artikeln, die die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt betreffen, sind in den Nummern 1 bis 12 enthalten.

In diesem Zusammenhang legt der FEMIPI angesichts der Unterschiedlichkeit der zur Zeit geltenden einzelstaatlichen Regelungen und im Interesse einer Vereinheitlichung, Wert auf die Feststellung, daß die Vertreter der Industrie bis an die Grenze der für sie annehmbaren Zugeständnisse gegangen sind, die zum Teil übrigens dazu führen, daß Vorrechte, die sie zur Zeit in Anspruch nehmen können, hinfällig werden.

33 Artikel 135

Es dürfte sowohl im Interesse der Patentinhaber als auch der Dritten nicht zweckmäßig sein, die „Umwandlung" einer europäischen Patentanmeldung unter den in Artikel 135 Absatz 1 Buchstabe b vorgesehenen Bedingungen zuzulassen.

The appeals procedure should be divided into two stages: the first, the formal lodging of the appeal, being required to be made within a period of two months, and the second, the statement of the grounds on which the appeal is based, being required to be made within a maximum period of six months.

29 Article 120, paragraph 2 (This Article has been taken by FEMIPI as an example)

FEMIPI strongly recommends that the time limits provided for the procedure, such as that laid down in Article 120, paragraph 2, should be at least two months.

30 Article 128, paragraph 5

The information available to third parties before publication should also, where appropriate, comprise the reference to the priority and the reference to the PCT origin of the application.

31 Articles 130 and 131

In the opinion of FEMIPI, information communicated to the national offices of non-Contracting States should in no event include information of substance.

In addition, whatever the reasons for such exchanges of information and for any other communications, the principle of the secrecy of the proceedings of the bodies concerned should be observed in the interests of the applicant.

32 Articles 133, 134 and 162

The observations, comments and suggestions of FEMIPI on these Articles, which deal with representation before the European Patent Office, are contained in references 1 to 12 .

In this connection FEMIPI would stress that in view of the diversity of the present national systems and in the interests of standardisation, agents of industry have made all the possible concessions acceptable to them even to the extent of making certain concessions which will lead to a loss of some rights at present enjoyed.

33 Article 135

Both in the interests of patentees and in the interests of third parties it would appear to be undesirable to permit the "conversion" of a European patent application in the circumstances laid down in Article 135, paragraph 1(b).

Page 35

ein europäisches Patenterteilungsverfahren (Dokument M / 1 ) und den Entwurf einer Ausführungsordnung zu diesem Übereinkommen (Dokument M/2), die am 8. Dezember 1972 als vorbereitende Dokumente für die Münchner Diplomatische Konferenz veröffentlicht worden sind, in ihrer Gesamtheit.

14 Die nachstehenden Bemerkungen betreffen gegebenenfalls zugleich die Artikel des Übereinkommensentwurfs und die Regeln des Ausführungsordnungsentwurfs.

15 Artikel 14, Regel 2 Absatz 1

Wenn die Verfahrenssprache gewechselt wird, sollte dies früher mitgeteilt werden; für die Übersetzung sollte das Patentamt sorgen, und die Kosten hierfür hätte der Beteiligte zu tragen, der den Wechsel der Verfahrenssprache beantragt.

16 Artikel 16 Im Zusammenhang mit den Artikeln 6, 15 und 73 sollte klargestellt werden, daß auch die Zweigstelle des Patentamts in Den Haag befugt ist, europäische Patentanmeldungen entgegenzunehmen.

17 Artikel 17, 18 und 31 Absatz 1 Buchstabe a Die Prüfungsabteilungen sollten nicht unbedingt und für ständig auf einen einzigen Prüfer verringert werden; ferner sollte ein Prüfer, der in einer Einspruchsabteilung mitwirkt, weder deren Vorsitzender noch Berichterstatter sein.

18 Artikel 67 Absatz 2

Es sollte klargestellt werden, daß der gemäß den ursprünglichen Patentansprüchen verliehene einstweilige Schutz im Falle einer "Verlagerung" (Shifting) der Patentansprüche während des Verfahrens nicht gegeben ist.

19 Artikel 74, Regel 25 Absatz 1a

Es sollte die Möglichkeit vorgesehen werden, eine Anmeldung jederzeit zu teilen, sofern der Gegenstand der Teilanmeldung in mindestens einem der anfänglich eingereichten Patentansprüche enthalten ist.

20 Artikel 76, Regel 24 Absatz 2 Das Europäische Patentamt sollte zur Kontrolle auf der Empfangsbescheinigung neben dem Tag des Eingangs und der Nummer der Anmeldung auch noch systematisch alle eingegangenen Unterlagen aufführen.

Draft Convention establishing a European System for the Grant of Patents (Document M/1) and the Draft Implementing Regulations to that Convention (Document M/2), published on 8 December 1972 as preparatory documents for the Munich Diplomatic Conference.

14 The comments below relate, where so indicated, both to the Articles of the Draft Convention and to the Rules of the Draft Implementing Regulations.

15 Article 14; Rule 2, paragraph 1

Where the language of the proceedings is changed notification should be made much earlier and provision for interpreting should be made by the European Patent Office at the expense of the party requesting the change.

16 Article 16

In connection with Articles 6, 15 and 73, it should be made clear that the branch of the office at The Hague is also competent to receive European patent applications.

17 Articles 17, 18 and 31, paragraph 1(a)

Examination of cases by only one examiner in the Examining Divisions should not be of an absolute and permanent nature; in addition an examiner who is a member of an Opposition Division should not be the Chairman or rapporteur of that Division.

18 Article 67, paragraph 2

It should be stated that provisional protection on the basis of the original claims does not apply where there is a shifting of claims during the procedure.

19 Article 74; Rule 25, paragraph 1(a)

It should be stated that divisional applications may be made at any time provided that the subjectmatter of the divisional application is comprised in at least one of the claims originally filed.

20 Article 76; Rule 24, paragraph 2

For control purposes the receipt issued by the Office should always list the number of documents received in addition to the date of receipt and the application number.

Page 36

Erfordernis einer besonderen Befähigung, so muß der Antragsteller die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz des betreffenden Staats mindestens fünf Jahre lang ausgeübt haben oder nachweisen, daß er auf eine andere Weise mindestens fünf Jahre lang auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens in dem betreffenden Staat tätig gewesen ist. Die Voraussetzung, daß die Vertretung oder eine Tätigkeit auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens auf andere Weise ausgeübt wurde, ist jedoch nicht für Personen erforderlich, deren Befähigung (...) auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens nach Vorschriften dieses Staats amtlich festgestellt worden ist. Aus der Bescheinigung der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz muß sich ergeben, daß der Antragsteller eine der in diesem Absatz genannten Voraussetzungen erfültt. (4) Der Präsident des Europäischen Patentamts kann von dem in Absatz 3 Satz 1 genannten Erfordernis, daß die Vertretung oder eine Tätigkeit auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens auf andere Weise fünf Jahre lang ausgeübt worden ist, Befreiung erteilen, wenn der Antragsteller nachweist, daß er die erforderliche Befähigung anderweitig erworben hat. (5) Personen, die ihren Geschäftssitz oder ihren Arbeitsplatz in einem Staat haben, der diesem Übereinkommen weniger als ein Jahr vor Ablauf der Ubergangszeit nach Absatz 1 oder nach Ablauf der Ubergangszeit beitritt, können während einer Zeit von einem Jahr, gerechnet vom Zeitpunkt des Wirksamwerdens des Beitritts des genannten Staats an, unter den Voraussetzungen der Absätze 1 bis 4 in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter eingetragen werden. (6) Die Personen, die in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter aufgrund von Absatz 1 eingetragen sind, dürfen vor dem Europäischen Patentamt die Vertretung nur in dem Umfang wahrnehmen, in dem sie gemäß der Bescheinigung der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens in dem Vertragsstaat wahrnehmen können, in dem sie ihren Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz haben. (7) Personen, die in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter aufgrund Absatz 1 eingetragen sind, bleiben auch nach Ende der Ubergangszeit, ohne die europäische Eignungsprüfung nach Artikel 134 Absatz 2 Buchstabe c ablegen zu müssen, ungeachtet der Bestimmungen des Absatzes 6 unbeschränkt zur Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt berechtigt, selbst wenn sie nicht Angehörige eines Vertragsstaats sind, sofern gemäß den Absätzen 2 und 3 ihre Befähigung durch die Bescheinigung der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz festgestellt worden ist."

II

13 Die nachstehenden Bemerkungen des Europäischen Verbands der Industrie-Patentingenieure (FEMIPI) betreffen den Entwurf eines Übereinkommens über be entered on the list must have acted as representatives in patent matters before the central industrial property office of the said State or supply proof that they have acted in patent matters in some other manner in the territory of that State for at least five years. However ( . . .), persons whose qualifications (...) in patent matters (...) are officially recognised in accordance with (...) regulations laid down by such State shall not be subject to the condition of having acted as a representative or of having acted in patent matters in some other manner. The certificate furnished by the central industrial property office must indicate that the applicant satisfies one of the conditions referred to in the present paragraph. (4) The President of the European Patent Office may grant exemption from the requirement of having acted as a representative or of having acted in patent matters in some other manner for five years, in accordance with paragraph 3, first sentence, of this Article, if the applicant furnishes proof that he has acquired the requisite qualification in another way. (5) Persons having their places of business or employment in a State which acceded to this Convention less than one year before the expiry of the transitional period referred to in paragraph 1 or after the expiry of the transitional period, may, under the conditions laid down in paragraphs 1 to 4 , during a period of one year calculated from the date of entry into force of the accession of that State, be entered on the list of professional representatives. (6) Persons whose names are entered, pursuant to paragraph 1 , on the list of professional representatives may only act before the European Patent Office to the extent that they are entitled, within the terms of the certificate furnished by the central industrial property office to act as (...) representatives in patent matters in the Contracting States in which they exercise their profession or are employed. (7) Persons whose names are entered, pursuant to paragraph 1 , on the list of professional representatives shall continue to be entitled to act as professional representatives before the European Patent Office after the expiry of the transitional period without having to take the European qualifying examination under Article 134, paragraph 2(c), and without any restrictions notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 6, if their qualifications have been recognised by the certificate furnished by the central industrial property office pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 above, even though they may not be nationals of one of the Contracting States."

II

13 The present comments have been drawn up by the European Federation of Agents of Industry in Industrial Property (FEMIPI). They concern the

Page 37

tretung in Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt zu begründen. (5) Der Präsident des Europäischen Patentamts kann in besonders gelagerten Fällen von der Voraussetzung nach Absatz 2 Buchstabe a Befreiung erteilen. (6) Die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann auch von jedem Rechtsanwalt, der in einem Vertragsstaat zugelassen ist und seinen Geschäftssitz in diesem Staat hat, in dem Umfang wahrgenommen werden, in dem er in diesem Staat die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens ausüben kann. Absatz 4 ist entsprechend anzuwenden. (7) Der Verwaltungsrat kann Vorschriften über die Vorbildung und die Ausbildung erlassen, die eine Person besitzen muß, um zu der europäischen Eignungsprüfung zugelassen zu werden, über die Durchführung der europäischen Eignungsprüfung, die Errichtung oder Anerkennung eines Instituts, in denen die zugelassenen Vertreter zusammengeschlossen sind, sowie über die Disziplinargewalt, die dieses Institut oder das Europäische Patentamt über diese Person besitzt."

12 Artikel 162 - Zugelassene Vertreter während einer Ubergangszeit

,(1) Während einer Ubergangszeit, deren Ende der Verwaltungsrat bestimmt, kann in Abweichung von Artikel 134 Absatz 2 in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter jede natürliche Person eingetragen werden, die ( . . .) a) ihren Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz im Gebiet eines Vertragsstaats hat; b) befugt ist, die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens in dem Vertragsstaat, in dem sie ihren Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz hat, gemäß einer Bescheinigung auszuüben, die die Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz des betreffenden Vertragsstaats ausgestellt hat. Die Eintragung erfolgt auf Antrag, dem Bescheinigungen beizufügen sind, aus denen sich die Erfüllung der obengenannten Voraussetzungen ergibt. (2) Unterliegt in einem Vertragsstaat die Befugnis zur Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens nationalen Vorschriften und dem Erfordernis einer besonderen Befähigung, so muß sich aus der Be- scheinigung der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz dieses Staates ergeben, daß der Antragsteller eine besondere Eignungsprüfung abgelegt hat; gegebenenfalls muß sich aus dieser Bescheinigung auch ergeben, in welchem Umfang der Antragsteller die Vertretung vor dieser Behörde wahrnehmen darf. (3) Unterliegt in einem Vertragsstaat die Befugnis zur Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens keinen nationalen Vorschriften und/oder nicht dem establish a place of business in the Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands for the purpose of acting as a professional representative in proceedings before the European Patent Office. (5) The President of the European Patent Office may, in special circumstances, grant exemption from the requirement of paragraph 2(a). (6) (...) Representation before the European Patent Office may also be undertaken by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States and having his place of business within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a (...) representative in patent matters. Paragraph 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis. (7) The Administrative Council may adopt provisions governing the qualifications and training required of a person for admission to the European qualifying examination, the conduct of the European qualifying examination, the establishment or recognition of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives, and any disciplinary power to be exercised by that institute or the European Patent Office on such persons."

12 "Article 162 - Professional representatives during a transitional period

(1) During a transitional period, the expiry of which shall be determined by the Administrative Council, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 134, paragraph 2, any natural person (. . . ) may be entered on the list of professional representatives who: (a) has his place of business or employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States; (b) is authorised to act in patent matters in the territory of the Contracting State in which he has his place of business or employment, pursuant to a certificate issued by the central industrial property office of the said Contracting State. Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the abovementioned conditions are fulfilled. (2) When, in any Contracting State, entitlement to act in patent matters is governed by national regulations and is conditional upon the requirement of special qualifications, the certificate furnished by the central industrial property office of that State must (...) indicate that the person applying to be entered on the list has passed a special qualifying examination and must also specify, where appropriate, the extent to which he may act as a (...) representative before this authority. (3) When in any Contracting State, entitlement to act in patent matters is not governed by national regulations and/or conditional upon the requirement of special qualifications, persons applying to

Page 38

(1) Vorbehaltlich Absatz 2 ist niemand verpflichtet, sich vor dem Europäischen Patentamt (...) vertreten zu lassen. (2) Die natürlichen und juristischen Personen, die weder Wohnsitz noch Sitz in einem Vertragsstaat haben, müssen in jedem Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt durch einen zugelassenen Vertreter vertreten sein und Handlungen mit Wirkung gegenüber dem Europäischen Patentamt mit Ausnahme der Einreichung einer europäischen Patentanmeldung durch ihn vornehmen; in der Ausführungsordnung können weitere Ausnahmen zugelassen werden. (3) Die natürlichen und juristischen Personen mit Wohnsitz oder Sitz in einem Vertragsstaat sind berechtigt, in jedem Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt durch einen ihrer Angestellten zu handeln, der kein zugelassener Vertreter zu sein braucht, aber einer Vollmacht nach Maßgabe der Ausführungsordnung bedarf. In der Ausführungsordnung wird vorgeschrieben, unter welchen Voraussetzungen Angestellte einer juristischen Person auch für andere juristische Personen mit Wohnsitz oder Sitz im Gebiet eines Vertragsstaats, die mit ihr wirtschaftlich verbunden sind, handeln können. (4) In der Ausführungsordnung sind Vorschriften über die (...) Vertretung mehrerer Beteiligter, die gemeinsam handeln, enthalten."

11 ,,Artikel 134 - Zugelassene Vertreter

(1) Die Vertretung natürlicher und juristischer Personen in jedem Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann nur durch zugelassene Vertreter wahrgenommen werden, die in eine beim Europäischen Patentamt geführte Liste eingetragen sind. (2) In die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter kann jede natürliche Person eingetragen werden, die die folgenden Voraussetzungen erfült: a) Die Person muß die Staatsangehörigkeit eines Vertragsstaats besitzen; b) die Person muß ihren Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz in einem Vertragsstaat haben; c) die Person muß die europäische Eignungsprüfung bestanden haben. Die Eintragung erfolgt aufgrund eines Antrags, dem Bescheinigungen beizufügen sind, aus denen sich die Erfüllung dieser Voraussetzungen ergibt. (3) Die Personen, die in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter eingetragen sind, sind berechtigt, vor allen Organen des Europäischen Patentamts aufzutreten. (4) Jede Person, die in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter eingetragen ist, ist berechtigt, in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in den Niederlanden einen Geschäftssitz zur Ausübung der Ver-

10 "Article 133 - Representation

(1) Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, no person shall be compelled to be represented before the European Patent Office (. . .). (2) Natural and legal persons not having either a residence or registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States must be represented in all proceedings before the European Patent Office by a professional representative and act through him viz-à-vis that Office, other than in filing the European patent application; the Implementing Regulations may permit other exceptions. (3) Natural and legal persons having their residence or registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States shall be entitled to be represented in any proceedings before the European Patent Office by an employee, who need not be a professional representative but who must be authorised in accordance with the Implementing Regulations. The Implementing Regulations shall determine under what conditions an employee of such a legal person may also represent other legal persons which have their residence or (...) their registered places of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States and which have economic links with the first legal person. (4) The Implementing Regulations shall prescribe special provisions concerning the (. . .) representation of parties acting in common."

11 "Article 134 - Professional representatives

(1) Representation of natural and legal persons in all proceedings before the European Patent Office may only be undertaken by professional representatives whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the Office. (2) Any natural person who fulfils the following conditions may be entered on the list of professional representatives: (a) he must be a national of one of the Contracting States; (b) he must have his place of business or employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States; (c) he must have passed the European qualifying examination. Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the above conditions are fulfilled. (3) Persons whose names appear on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to act before all departments of the European Patent Office. (4) Any person whose name appears on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to

Page 39

Der FEMIPI schlägt deshalb vor, in Artikel 162 Absätze 2 und 7 vorzusehen, daß eine besondere Eignungsprüfung abzulegen ist bzw. daß jede Einschränkung der Möglichkeit, die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt nach der Ubergangszeit auszuüben, aufgehoben wird.

8 In bezug auf Artikel 162 Absatz 3, der nach Ansicht des FEMIPI für die Vertragsstaaten gilt, in denen keine Vorschriften über die Befugnis zur Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens bestehen, möchte der FEMIPI nachdrücklich hervorheben, a) daß in mehreren Ländern, die als Vertragsstaaten in Frage kommen, die Formalitäten bei der Einreichung und Prüfung von Patentanmeldungen es durchaus nicht für alle Gruppen von Vertretern erforderlich machen, vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz dieser Länder persönlich aufzutreten; b) daß die Vertreter der Industrie im allgemeinen zur Aufgabe haben, Patenterteilungsverfahren in eigener Verantwortung zu bearbeiten, und zwar auch in den Ländern, in denen dieses Verfahren mit einer vorherigen Neuheits- und Patentierbarkeitsprüfung verbunden ist.

Der FEMIPI befürchtet deshalb, daß eine zu enge Auslegung des Artikels 162 Absatz 3 dazu führen könnte, daß in einigen Ländern entweder bei der Anwendung des Ubereinkommens oder bei der Aufstellung von Vorschriften über die Befugnis zur Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens, mit denen dem genannten Artikel entsprochen werden soll, die derzeitigen Vorrechte der Industrievertreter in einer nach Ansicht des FEMIPI ungerechtfertigten Weise eingeschränkt werden.

Der FEMIPI beantragt daher, in Artikel 162 Absatz 3 ausdrücklich vorzusehen, daß die Berechtigung zur Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens vor dem Europäischen Patentamt nicht nur dann gegeben ist, wenn eine Vertretung vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz eines Vertragsstaats tatsächlich ausgeübt worden ist, sondern auch dann, wenn die Tätigkeit in der Eigenschaft als Vertreter der Industrie in einer besonderen Abteilung eines Unternehmens mit Sitz in einem Vertragsstaat ausgeübt wurde.

9 Der FEMIPI möchte abschließend darauf hinweisen, daß seine Bemerkungen und Vorschläge die Grundsätze der Artikel 133, 134 und 162 in der von der Regierungskonferenz erarbeiteten Fassung nicht in Frage stellen, sondern vielmehr zum Ziel haben, diese Bestimmungen genauer zu fassen oder gewissen Schwierigkeiten bei ihrer Anwendung vorzubeugen.

Der vollständige Wortlaut der Artikel 133, 134 und 162 in der sich aus den Bemerkungen und Vorschlägen des FEMIPI ergebenden Fassung wird nachstehend wiedergegeben; die weggefallenen Textstellen sind durch (...) gekennzeichnet, und die Änderungen sind kursiv gedruckt. graphs 2 and 7 , should refer respectively to the passing of special qualifying examinations and to the abrogation of all restrictions on the right to act as a representative before the European Patent Office after the expiry of the transitional period.

8 In connection with Article 162, paragraph 3, which in the opinion of FEMIPI applies to Contracting States which do not have rules governing entitlement to act as a representative in patent matters, it should be emphasised that: (a) in several countries which may become Contracting States, the rules concerning the filing and the examination of patent applications in no way lay down requirements for all categories of representative to act in person before the national central industrial property office; (b) agents of industry normally handle the patent grant procedure in all countries, including those in which this procedure is subject to a prior examination as to novelty and patentability, on their own responsibility.

FEMIPI therefore fears that too restrictive an interpretation of Article 162, paragraph 3, either when the Convention is applied in certain countries or when these countries draw up rules governing entitlement to act as a representative in patent matters in order to comply with this provision, may lead to a limitation, which FEMIPI would consider to be unjustified, of the present rights of agents of industry.

FEMIPI therefore requests that Article 162, paragraph 3, should expressly lay down that persons shall be entitled to act in patent matters before the European Patent Office, not only where they have acted as representatives before the central industrial property office of one of the Contracting States, but also where they have carried out their activities in the capacity of agents of industry in a specialised department of an undertaking established in one of the Contracting States.

9 Finally, FEMIPI wishes to stress that the comments and suggestions which it has put forward are not intended to question the principles at the basis of the provisions of Articles 133, 134 and 162 as drawn up by the Inter-Governmental Conference, but that they are only intended to render these provisions more explicit and to forestall certain difficulties which might otherwise arise when they are applied.

The following gives in full the texts of Articles 133, 134 and 162 produced on the basis of the comments and suggestions made by FEMIPI; the deleted passages are indicated by (...) and the amendments are printed in italics.

Page 40

Bemerkungen und Vorschlägen der FEMIPI ergebenden Texte sind in der Form von Textvorschlägen für die Artikel 133, 134 und 162 unter den Nummern 10 bis 12 wiedergegeben.

4 Hinsichtlich der Artikel 133, 134 und 162 in ihrer Gesamtheit möchte der FEMIPI die Frage stellen, ob der in der englischen Fassung des Übereinkommens verwandte Ausdruck ,professional representative" den in den anderen Fassungen benutzten Ausdrücken, nämlich ,,mandataire agréé" bzw. ,zugelassener Vertreter", wirklich entspricht.

Der FEMIPI glaubt nicht, daß diese Ausdrücke einander völlig entsprechen, und befürchtet daher, daß sich hieraus in der Praxis gewisse Schwierigkeiten ergeben könnten; im Übereinkommenstext sollte keine Unklarheit bestehen bleiben, die entgegen den Grundzügen der von der Regierungskonferenz angenommenen Bestimmungen - zu einem Widerspruch gleich welcher Art führen könnte.

5 In bezug auf Artikel 133 Absatz 3 ist der FEMIPI der Ansicht, daß diese Bestimmung ,,positiv" ausgedrückt werden muß; in der Ausführungsordnung müssen also mit Inkrafttreten des Übereinkommens die Voraussetzungen festgelegt sein, unter denen ein Angestellter einer juristischen Person, der nicht auf der Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter steht, für andere juristische Personen, die zu derselben Unternehmensgruppe wie die erstgenannte juristische Person gehören, handeln kann.

6 Hinsichtlich des Artikels 162 Absatz 1 meint der FEMIPI, daß diese Bestimmung so gefaBt werden sollte, daB sie eine Parallelbestimmung zu Artikel 134 Absatz 2 bildet; der Artikel 162 Absätze 2 und 3 würde somit lediglich die Vertragsstaaten betreffen, in denen Vorschriften über die Befugnis zur Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens bestehen bzw. nicht bestehen.

7 Was den Artikel 162 Absätze 2 und 7 anbelangt, so meint der FEMIPI, daB in den Vertragsstaaten, in denen die Befugnis zur Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens dem Erfordernis einer besonderen Eignungsprüfung unterworfen ist, die natürlichen Personen, die diese Prüfung bestanden haben, zur Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt nach Ablauf der Ubergangszeit ohne irgendwelche Einschränkungen ermächtigt werden sollten.

Der FEMIPI bedauert es sehr, daB in Anwendung besonderer nationaler Vorschriften Diskriminierungen geschaffen werden oder geschaffen werden könnten, die auf der Staatsangehörigkeit des Vertreters beruhen oder mit den Bedingungen zusammenhängen, unter denen er seinen Beruf ausübt; es ist ihr Wunsch, daB diese Diskriminierungen in kürzester Frist beseitigt werden und daB sie jedenfalls am Ende der in Artikel 162 vorgesehenen Ubergangszeit nicht mehr bestehen.

Articles 133, 134 and 162 as derived from these comments and suggestions is given under points 10 to 12 .

4 With respect to Articles 133, 134 and 162 taken as a whole, FEMIPI wonders whether the expression "professional representative" in the English version of the Convention does in fact correspond exactly to the expressions used in the other versions, i.e. "mandataire agréé" and "zugelassener Vertreter".

FEMIPI does not believe that the English text corresponds exactly with the versions in the other two languages and therefore fears that certain practical difficulties of application may arise; it does not wish there to be any ambiguity in the text of the Convention which might lead to any sort of conflict in contradiction with the general lines of the provisions adopted by the Inter-Governmental Conference.

5 FEMIPI is of the opinion that Article 133, paragraph 3, should be worded in a "positive" manner; the Implementing Regulations must therefore, as from the entry into force of the Convention, lay down the conditions under which an employee of a legal person who is not registered in the list of professional representatives, may represent other legal persons having economic links with the first legal person.

6 FEMIPI considers that Article 162, paragraph 1, should be so worded as to constitute a parallel with Article 134, paragraph 2, thereby leaving the provisions of Article 162, paragraphs 2 and 3, to deal respectively with Contracting States in which there are rules governing entitlement to act as a representative in patent matters and Contracting States in which there are no such rules.

7 With respect to Article 162, paragraphs 2 and 7, FEMIPI considers that in the Contracting States in which entitlement to act as a representative in patent matters is subject to a special qualifying examination, natural persons who have passed this examination should be entitled to act as representatives before the European Patent Office without any restrictions after the expiry of the transitional period.

FEMIPI profoundly regrets that, under certain national provisions, discrimination is or could be applied on the basis of the nationality of the representative or in connection with the conditions under which the latter may carry out his profession; it desires discrimination of this nature to be eliminated as soon as possible and, in any event, as from the expiry of the transitional period laid down in Article 162.

FEMIPI therefore proposes that Article 162, para-

Page 41

1 Der Europäische Verband der Industrie-Patentingenieure (FEMIPI), der sich aus nachstehenden nationalen Vereinigungen zusammensetzt:

- Verband Vertretungsberechtigter Patentingenieure und Patentassessoren e.V., Bundesrepublik Deutschland - Ring der Angestellten in Gewerblichen Rechtsschutzen, Österreich - Union Belge des Conseils d'Industrie en Propriété Industrielle / Belgische Vereniging der Nijverheidsraadgevers in Nijverheidseigendom, Belgien - Dansk Forening for Industriens Patentingeniører Dänemark - Association Francaise des Spécialistes en Propriété Industrielle de l'Industrie, Frankreich - Associazione Italiana dei Consulenti in Proprieta Industriale di Entio Imprese, Italien - Norsk Forening for Industriens Patentingeniörer, Norwegen - Svenska Industriens Patentingenjörers Förening, Schweden nimmt nachstehend zu den Artikeln 133, 134 und 162 des Entwurfs eines Ubereinkommens über ein europäisches Patentertteilungsverfahren (Dokument M/1), der am 8. Dezember 1972 als vorbereitendes Dokument für die Münchner Diplomatische Konferenz veröffentlicht wurde, Stellung.

2 Die neuen Bestimmungen der Artikel 133, 134 und 162 des Ubereinkommensentwurfs in der Textfassung vom 8. Dezember 1972 betreffend die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt stellen gegenüber den Bestimmungen der Artikel 153 und 154 der voraufgegangenen Entwürfe ganz gewiß eine wesentliche Verbesserung dar.

Der FEMIPI stellt fest, daß die Arbeit der Regierungskonferenz zu Bestimmungen geführt hat, die in ihren Grundzügen die interessierten Kreise weitgehend befriedigen dürften, obgleich hinsichtlich ihrer Anwendung noch einige Vorbehalte vorgebracht werden können.

Der FEMIPI stellt insbesondere fest, daß durch diese Bestimmungen für die endgültige Regelung der Grundsatz der Gleichberechtigung bei gleicher Qualifikation zwischen den freiberuflichen Patentanwälten und den durch Arbeitsvertrag gebundenen Vertretern der Industrie angenommen wird.

3 Im Interesse einer klaren und präzisen Fassung möchte der FEMIPI jedoch noch einige Bemerkungen oder Vorschläge unterbreiten, von denen einige rein redaktioneller Art sind; die sich aus den

1 The present comments have been drawn up by the European Federation of Agents of Industry in Industrial Property (FEMIPI), an organisation which comprises the following national associations:

- Verband Vertretungsberechtigter Patentingenieure und Patentassessoren e.V., Federal Republic of Germany - Ring der Angestellten in Gewerblichen Rechtsschutzen, Austria - Union Belge des Conseils d'Industrie en Propriété Industrielle / Belgische Vereniging der Nijverheidsraadgevers in Nijverheidseigendom, Belgium - Dansk Forening for Industriens Patentingeniører, Denmark - Association Française des Spécialistes en Propriété Industrielle de l'Industrie, France - Associazione Italiana dei Consulenti in Proprietà Industriale di Entio Imprese, Italy - Norsk Forening for Industriens Patentingeniörer, Norway - Svenska Industriens Patentingenjörers Förening, Sweden.

They concern Articles 133, 134 and 162 of the Draft Convention establishing a European System for the Grant of Patents (Document M/1), published on 8 December 1972 as a preparatory document for the Munich Diplomatic Conference.

2 The new provisions of Articles 133, 134 and 162 of the Draft Convention as contained in the text of 8 December 1972, dealing with representation before the European Patent Office, undoubtedly constitute a considerable improvement on Articles 153 and 154 of the previous drafts.

FEMIPI considers that the work of the InterGovernmental Conference has resulted in provisions the broad lines of which should to a large extent satisfy the interested circles even though some reservations may still be made as concerns their application.

FEMIPI notes in particular that, as concerns the system which will finally be applied, these provisions confirm the principle of the equivalence of rights, where their qualifications are the same, of patent agents carrying out their profession on a self-employed basis and agents of industry bound by an employment contract.

3 However in the interests of clarity and exactness, FEMIPI wishes to put forward some additional comments and suggestions, some of which only concern the wording of the text. The wording of

FEMIPI

Europäischer Verband der Industrie-Patentingenieure

COMMENTS BY

FEMIPI European Federation of Agents of Industry in Industrial Property

PRISE DE POSITION DE LA

FEMIPI Fédération européenne des mandataires de l'industrie en propriété industrielle

Page 43

43 Die Form selbst ist verbessert worden, doch hat sich dabei der Gebrauch der Worte ,,profession, professionnel" nicht vermeiden lassen, deren Bedeutung im Englischen und im Französischen nicht gleich ist, da die nationalen Regelungen in Großbritannien einerseits und in den europäischen Staaten, in denen die freie Wahl des Vertreters besteht, andererseits sehr unterschiedlich sind. Es wird daher vorgeschlagen, den genannten Artikeln einen Absatz vorauszuschicken, in dem klargestellt wird, daß die Begriffe ,,profession, professionnel" so zu verstehen sind, daß sie für alle Personen gelten, die ihre Tätigkeit auf dem Gebiet des gewerblichen Rechtsschutzes regelmäBig freiberuflich oder als Angestellte eines Unternehmens ausüben.

44 Auch dann, wenn, wie vorgeschlagen, eine solche Bestimmung vorsichtshalber vorangestellt würde, enthielte Artikel 162 nach Ansicht des CIFE ungeeignete Ausdrücke, insbesondere ,,représenter" (,vertreten") in Absatz 1 Buchstabe b, ,,en cette qualité" (,zur Vertretung", ,,diese Vertretung") in Absatz 3 (Satz 1), ,représentation à titre habituel" (,regelmäßige Vertretung") in Absatz 4 und ,,en qualité de mandataire agréé" (,die Vertretung wahrnehmen") in Absatz 6, da sie sich auf nationale Regelungen beziehen, nach denen es aber gerade weder zugelassene Vertreter noch eine Vertretungsbefugnis gibt. CIFE schlägt daher folgende rein redaktionelle Änderungen vor, die sich lediglich auf die Länder beziehen, in denen die Wahl der Vertreter frei ist.

Artikel 162 (geändert)

(Die vorgeschlagenen Änderungen sind kursiv gedruckt) ,(1) Während einer Übergangszeit, deren Ende der Verwaltungsrat bestimmt, kann in Abweichung von Artikel 134 Absatz 2 in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter jede natürliche Person eingetragen werden, die die folgenden Voraussetzungen erfüllt: a) Die Person muß ihren Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz im Gebiet eines Vertragsstaats haben; b) Die Person muß befugt sein, für natürliche oder juristische Personen auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz des Vertragsstaats aufzutreten, in dem sie ihren Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz hat. (2) Die Eintragung erfolgt auf Antrag, dem Bescheinigungen beizufügen sind, aus denen sich die Erfüllung der in Absatz 1 genannten Voraussetzungen ergibt. In der Bescheinigung der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz ist auch der Umfang der Befugnis zur Vertretung vor dieser Behörde anzugeben. (3) Unterliegt in einem Vertragsstaat die Befugnis, auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz aufzutreten, nicht dem Erfordernis einer besonderen beruflichen Befähigung, so muß der Antragsteller

43 The wording has been improved, but it still has not avoided the use of the words "profession" and "professional" in English and in French. The term does not cover exactly the same concept in the two languages, particularly if one takes into account differences at the national level in the United Kingdom and in European countries where the choice of representative is left free. In order to improve matters, it is suggested to have these Articles preceded by a paragraph stating that the terms "profession, professional" are to be understood as applying to all persons habitually exercising an activity in the field of industrial property, on a self-employed basis or in industrial employment.

44 The wording of Article 162, even considering the cautionary statement according to the suggestion above, in the opinion of CEIF contains inappropriate expressions, in particular "represent" in paragraph 1(b), "en cette qualité" ("as professional representatives") in paragraph 3, "habitually ... as professional representative" in paragraph 4 "en qualité de mandataire agréé" (as professional representatives) in paragraph 6, for these clauses refer to national situations in which precisely there are no "mandataires agréés" nor is there "habilitation". CEIF accordingly proposes the following purely editorial amendments which only concern those countries where the choice of representative is free.

Article 162 (amended)

(amended parts printed in italics) "(1) During a transitional period, the expiry of which shall be determined by the Administrative Council, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 134, paragraph 2, any natural person who fulfils the following conditions may be entered on the list of professional representatives: (a) he must have his place of business or employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States; (b) he must be authorised to act on behalf of natural or legal persons in patent matters before the central industrial property office of the Contracting State in which he has his place of business or employment. (2) Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the above-mentioned conditions are fulfilled. The certificate furnished by the central industrial property office must also specify the extent of the entitlement to act as a professional representative before this authority. (3) When, in any Contracting State, entitlement to act in patent matters before the central industrial property office is not conditional upon the requirement of special professional qualifications, persons applying to be entered on the list who act in patent matters before the central industrial property office

Page 44

mit PCT-Ursprung handelt, sofern dies der Fall ist.

Artikel 157 - Veröffentlichung der internationalen Anmeldung

38 CIFE möchte, daß im Europäischen Patentblatt auf die Veröffentlichung der europäischen Anmeldung auch dann hingewiesen wird, wenn die entsprechende internationale Anmeldung bereits veröffentlicht worden ist.

Dritter Teil
REDAKTIONELLE BEMERKUNGEN

Artikel 16 - Zuständigkeit der Eingangsstelle 39 Es wäre wünschenswert, zumindest die französische Fassung zu verbessern, um klarer herauszustellen, daß sich die beiden Bedingungen kumulieren und die Eingangsstelle bis zu dem Zeitpunkt zuständig ist, an dem die letzte der beiden Bedingungen erfüllt ist.

Artikel 58 Absatz 1 - Recht auf das europäische Patent

40 Es dürfte zweckmäßiger sein, den derzeitigen Absatz 1 wie folgt in zwei Absätze einzuteilen, wobei der bisherige Absatz 2 zu Absatz 3 würde: ,(1) Das Recht auf das europäische Patent . . ., dem der Arbeitnehmer angehört. (2) Haben mehrere eine Erfindung . . . benannten Vertragsstaaten. (3) Im Verfahren ... in den Absätzen 1 und 2 vorgesehene Recht geltend zu machen."

Artikel 88 Absatz 2 - Eingangsprüfung 41 Eine genauere Formulierung wäre wünschenswert. Anstelle von ,so wird die Anmeldung nicht als europäische Patentanmeldung behandelt" wäre es zweckmäßiger zu sagen: ,,so gilt die Anmeldung als nicht eingereicht".

Vierter Teil
VERTRETUNG

Artikel 133, 134 und 162 42 CIFE hält den derzeitigen Wortlaut der Artikel 133 und 134 in sachlicher Hinsicht für zufriedenstellend.

Article 157 - Publication of the international application

38 Notwithstanding publication of a corresponding international application, CEIF would wish mention of the publication of the European application in the European Patent Bulletin.

Article 16 - Competence of the Receiving Section

39 At least in the French text it would be desirable to improve the wording to render more explicit the cumulative character of the two conditions, the Receiving Section remaining responsible up to the date of the later of the two conditions to be fulfilled.

Article 58, paragraph 1 - Right to a European patent

40 It seems preferable to divide the present paragraph 1 into two paragraphs and to renumber paragraph 2 as paragraph 3, as follows: "(1) The right to a European patent . . . to which the employee is attached. (2) If two or more persons... in that application as published. (3) For the purposes of proceedings . . . referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2."

Article 88, paragraph 2 - Examination on filing

41 A more precise wording would be desirable. Rather than saying "the application shall not be dealt with as a European patent application" it seems preferable to say "the application is considered as not having been filed".

Articles 133, 134 and 162

42 The present text of Articles 133 and 134 is considered satisfactory by CEIF as to their substance.

Page 45

Original: Französisch French (1) Français

M/22 5. April 1973

5 April 1973 5 avril 1973

CIFE

Rat der Europäischen Industrieverbände

CEIF

Council of European Industrial Federations

PRISE DE POSITION DU

CIFE Conseil des fédérations industrielles d'Europe

Page 46

nen Unterlagen durch einen Brand in einem Postamt verhindert worden ist.

13 Vorschlag:

Die beiden ersten Zeilen des Absatzes (2) sollten wie folgt korrigiert werden: „Natürliche Personen, die nicht in einem der Vertragsstaaten ihren Wohnsitz haben, und juristische Personen, die nicht in einem der Vertragsstaaten gemäß den Gesetzen dieses Staates eingetragen sind, . . ."

14 Die beiden ersten Zeilen des Absatzes (3) sollen wie folgt korrigiert werden: „Natürliche Personen, die in einem der Vertragsstaaten ihren Wohnsitz haben, und juristische Personen, die in einem der Vertragsstaaten gemäß den Gesetzen dieses Staates eingetragen sind, können in . . .".

Begründung:

Es ist notwendig, zu unterscheiden zwischen den Bedingungen für natürliche und juristische Personen, nämlich zwischen dem Wohnsitz der natürlichen Person und der Eintragung der juristischen Person.

15 Vorschlag:

Im englischen Text sind die Worte „represented" in Zeile 3 und „represent" in Zeile 10 durch Worte zu ersetzen, die eindeutig unterschieden sind von dem Wort „represented" in Art. 133(2) Zeile 4 und die den Worten „handeln" und „agir" des deutschen bzw. französischen Textes entsprechen.

Begründung:

Die Texte der drei Sprachen müssen miteinander übereinstimmen.

Artikel 134, Absatz (2)b franz. Text

16 Vorschlag: Nach „ou" ist einzufügen ,,le lieu de".

Begründung:

Die Korrektur ist erforderlich, um den französischen Text an den deutschen und englischen Text anzupassen. provided for in Article 85, paragraph 1 and Article 93, paragraph 2, has been prevented by a fire in a post office.

13 Proposal:

The first two lines of paragraph 2 should be revised as follows: "Natural persons who are not resident in any of the Contracting States and legal persons who are not registered in any of the Contracting States according to the laws of this State . . ."

14 The first two lines of paragraph 3 should be corrected as follows: "Natural persons who are resident in any of the Contracting States and legal persons who are registered in any of the Contracting States according to the laws of this State, can in . . .".

Grounds:

It is necessary to differentiate between the conditions for natural and legal persons, namely between the residence of the natural person and the registration of the legal person.

15 Proposal:

In the English text, the words "represented" in line 3 and "represent" in line 10 are to be replaced by words which are clearly differentiated from the word "represented" in Article 133, paragraph 2, line 4, and which correspond to the words "handeln" and "agir" of the German and French texts respectively.

Grounds:

The texts in the three languages must agree with each other.

Article 134, paragraph 2(b), French text

16 Proposal: "le lieu de" is to be added after "ou".

Grounds:

The correction is necessary to bring the French text into conformity with the German and English texts.

Page 47

Original: Deutsch German (1) Allemand (2)

UNEPA

Union Europäischer Patentanwälte

COMMENTS BY

UNEPA Union of European Patent Agents

L'UNEPA

Union des Conseils en brevets européens

Page 48

und Verurteilung wegen einer Straftat schließen die Ausübung der Vertretung aus und sind beispielsweise Gründe für die Löschung in der Liste.

Artikel 134 - Regel 107

34 Damit vermieden wird, daß Personen ungerechtfertigt in der Liste gelöscht werden, wird empfohlen, in der 4. Zeile zwischen den Worten ,,oder" und ,nicht mehr erfüllt" folgende Worte einzufügen: ,,aus anderen Gründen als dem Wechsel des Geschäftssitzes oder Arbeitsplatzes".

Artikel 141

35 Da der genaue Termin der Erteilung nicht mit Bestimmtheit vorausgesagt werden kann, entsteht ein Problem, wenn er auf einen Tag fällt, der nahe am Jahrestag der europäischen Patentanmeldung liegt. Es wird empfohlen, den nationalen Behörden zu untersagen, Jahresgebühren, die innerhalb von drei Monaten nach der Erteilung fallig werden, vor Ablauf von drei Monaten nach der Erteilung zu erheben.

Artikel 162 Absatz 2

36 Es wird empfohlen, die gleiche Bedingung wie nach Artikel 134 Absatz 2 Buchstabe a vor den Artikel 162 Absatz 1 Buchstabe a einzufügen. Ferner sind ähnliche Ausnahmen wie nach Artikel 134 Absatz 5 erforderlich. Es wird nicht gewünscht, vorhandene Kollegen zu diskriminieren, sondern die Erfordernisse des Artikels 134 Absatz 2 Buchstabe a so früh wie möglich zur Anwendung zu bringen. Dementsprechend sollten Ausnahmen im Falle von Vertretern vorgeschrieben werden, die die Bedingungen für die Eintragung in die Liste zum Zeitpunkt der Unterzeichnung des Übereinkommens erfüllt haben.

Artikel 162 Absatz 2

37 Es ist nicht klar, worauf sich das Wort „Umfang" bezieht. Bezieht es sich auf Gruppen oder Kategorien von Anmeldern, für die er handeln kann, auf die Abteilungen der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz, vor denen er auftreten kann, oder auf die Anzahl der Anmeldungen, die er einreichen kann? Es wird empfohlen, daß dieser Absatz sowie Artikel 162 Absatz 6 die Anwendbarkeit des Artikels 134 Absatz 3 nicht beeinträchtigen dürfen. rendering unfit to represent are examples of reasons for such removal.

Article 134 - Rule 107

34 To prevent unfair removal, it is recommended that, in line 3 between "or" and "has", there be inserted the words "for reasons other than change of place of business or employment".

Article 141

35 As the exact date of grant cannot be accurately predicted, there is a problem when it falls close to the anniversary date of the European patent application. It is recommended to deny to national authorities the right to collect renewal fees falling due within 3 months of grant until 3 months from grant has elapsed.

Article 162 (1)

36 It is recommended to have the same condition (a) from Article 134 (2) inserted before Article 162 (1) (a). There is a need for exemptions in a similar manner to Article 134 (5). It is not desired to discriminate against existing colleagues but to make the requirements of Article 134 (2) (a) apply as soon as possible. Accordingly, such exemptions should be mandatory in the case of representatives who fulfilled the conditions for entry at the time of signature of the Convention.

Article 162 (2)

37 It is not clear to what "extent" reference is made. Is it to the groups or categories of applicant for whom he can act, the departments of the central industrial property office before whom he can appear, or the number of applications he can file. It is recommended that this paragraph and paragraph 162 (6) should not affect the applicability of Article 134 (3).

Page 49

die nach dem Recht eines Vertragsstaats gegründet worden sind, können . . ."

Artikel 133 Absatz 3

28 Es bestehen Zweifel in bezug auf das Wort ,,any" vor dem Wort ,,proceedings" im englischen Text. Ein in der Liste nach Artikel 134 geführter zugelassener Vertreter kann nach Artikel 144 wegen seiner Staatsangehörigkeit von der Möglichkeit ausgeschlossen werden, vor den im Rahmen des Artikels 143 Absatz 2 geschaffenen besonderen Organen aufzutreten, während ein nichtqualifizierter Angestellter eines Unternehmens mit derselben Staatsangehörigkeit auftreten dürfte.

Artikel 133 - Regel 102 Absatz 4

29 Da im Falle ausländischer Anmelder Verzögerungen möglich sind, könnte die starre Anwendung dieser Regel zu Ungerechtigkeiten führen. Für den Fall von Vertretern, die in der Liste geführt werden, wird vorgeschlagen, ihre Handlungen auch ohne Vollmacht zu akzeptieren.

Artikel 134 Absatz 3

30 Dieser Absatz dürfte angesichts des Artikels 134 Absatz 1 (obgleich durch Artikel 144 eingeschränkt) entweder überflüssig sein oder sollte dahingehend klargestellt werden, daß er auf die in Artikel 162 Absatz 6 genannten Personen anwendbar ist.

Artikel 134 Absätze 3 und 4

31 Es wird zu bedenken gegeben, ob solche Rechte nicht auf Länder ausgedehnt werden sollen, deren Zentralbehörden für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz mit Aufgaben im Rahmen des Protokolls M/5 betraut werden, sofern dieses Protokoll angenommen wird.

Artikel 134 Absatz 6

32 Im englischen Text sollte zwecks Übereinstimmung mit dem deutschen und dem französischen Text das Wort ,,able" durch ,,entitled" ersetzt werden.

Artikel 134 - Neue Regel

33 Es wird empfohlen, eine der Regel 103 folgende neue Regel vorzusehen, damit Namen in der Liste gelöscht bzw. in diese wiederaufgenommen werden können. Tod, Konkurs, Unzurechnungsfähigkeit

Article 133 (3)

28 In the English text, the word "any" before "proceedings" is questioned. A professional representative on the list under Article 134 may be excluded under Article 144 from appearing before special departments created under Article 143 (2) because of his nationality, yet an unqualified employee of a company of that nationality may appear.

Article 133 - Rule 102 (4)

29 With possible delays in the case of foreign applicants, the inflexible application of this Rule could produce inequities. In the case of representatives on the list, it is suggested that their actions be accepted, even without authorisation.

Article 134 (3)

30 This paragraph seems to be either superfluous in view of Article 134 (1) (though restricted by Article 144) or it should be clarified as to its applicability to persons mentioned in Article 162 (6).

Article 134 (3) and (4)

31 It is suggested that consideration be given to the extension of such rights to countries whose Central Industrial Property Offices are charged with tasks under Protocol M/5, if the Protocol is accepted.

Article 134 (6)

32 In the English text, it is thought that "able" should be "entitled", to agree with the French and German texts.

Article 134 - New Rule

33 It is recommended that a new Rule following Rule 103 be adopted to enable the removal and restoration of names from and to the list. Death, bankruptcy, insanity and conviction for a crime

CNIPA

Committee of National Institutes of Patent Agents

CNIPA

Committee of National Institutes of Patent Agents

PRISE DE POSITION DU

CNIPA Committee of National Institutes of Patent Agents

Page 51

wird vorgeschlagen, zwischen „ou" und „son" einzusetzen ,,le lieu de".

30 In der englischen Fassung des Art. 162(1)(b) wird vorgeschlagen, ,,authorised" zu ändern in "entitled".

31 Trotz der Versicherungen, die wiederholt von Behörden gegeben wurden, scheint doch an einigen Stellen ein Zweifel zu bestehen, ob Art. 162(6) möglicherweise im Sinne einer Beschränkung im Hinblick darauf, vor welchen Organen des EuropaPatentamtes ein Vertreter einschreiten darf, auszulegen ist und so gegebenenfalls Art. 134(3) derogiert werden könnte.

32 Um jedwede derartige Zweifel auszuschließen, wird vorgeschlagen, am Ende des Art. 162(6) anzufügen: „Diese Bestimmung soll die Anwendbarkeit des Art. 134(3) nicht beeinträchtigen."

Annahme von ins einzelne gehenden Regeln

33 Die FICPI drückt höflich den Wunsch aus, die Berufsorganisationen zu hören, bevor im Hinblick auf die vielen Regeln Entscheidungen getroffen werden, die vom Verwaltungsrat und dem Präsidenten des Europäischen Patentamtes anzunehmen sind, um die Bestimmungen des Vertrages zu verwirklichen.

BEMERKUNGEN

zu anderen Artikeln, Regeln und Dokumenten

Ubersetzung in Landessprachen

34 In der deutschen Fassung des Art. 68(3) wird vorgeschlagen, die Worte „enger ist als der Schutzbereich in der Verfahrenssprache" zu ersetzen durch ,nicht über den Schutzbereich in der Verfahrenssprache hinausgeht".

35 Dies scheint der Ausdrucksweise in der englischen und französischen Fassung besser zu entsprechen.

Vertragliche Lizenzen

36 Es wird vorgeschlagen, in Art. 71, Zeile 1, zwischen „kann" und „Gegenstand" einzusetzen ,,zur Gänze oder teilweise".

37 Es wird darauf hingewiesen, daß diese Art einer Lizenzvergabe bei den gegenwärtigen nationalen Patentsystemen nicht unüblich ist, insbesondere dann, wenn eine Erfindung über einen verhältnismäßig großen Benützungsbereich anwendbar ist. proposed to insert "le lieu de" between "ou" and "son".

30 In the English version of Art. 162(1)(b) it is proposed to change "authorised" to "entitled".

31 It has been found that in spite of the assurances that have repeatedly been given by the authorities there still exists a doubt in some quarters as to whether Art. 162(6) could possibly be construed to refer to limitations in respect of the bodies of the European Patent Office before which a representative is entitled to act, and could possibly overrule Art. 134(3).

32 In order to remove any such doubts, it is proposed to add at the end of Art. 162(6): "This provision shall not affect the applicability of Art. 134(3)."

Adoption of Detailed Rules

33 The FICPI respectfully expresses the wish that the profession may be heard before decisions are taken on the many rules which will have to be adopted by the Administrative Council and the President of the European Patent Office in order to materialise the provisions of the Convention.

Translation into National Languages

34 In the German version of Art. 68(3) it is proposed to replace "enger ist als der Schutzbereich in der Verfahrenssprache" by "nicht über den Schutzbereich in der Verfahrenssprache hinausgeht".

35 This would appear to agree more accurately with the expressions in the English and French versions.

Contractual Licensing

36 In Art. 71, line 1 it is proposed to add "in its entirety or in part" between "licensed" and "for".

37 It is observed that this form of licensing is not unusual under present national patent systems, particularly in cases where an invention has applications over a relatively wide range of uses.

Page 52

soll das Europäische Patentamt eine Eintragung des Vertreters in die Liste gemäß Art. 134(1) versagen oder soll ihn aus der Liste streichen oder suspendieren oder seine Berechtigung gemäß der jeweiligen Sachlage einschränken. Wenn später die Gründe für eine Streichung, Suspension oder Einschränkung der Berechtigung nicht mehr vorliegen, soll eine Wiedereintragung der Person in die Liste oder ein Aufheben der Suspension oder der Beschränkung der Berechtigung die Ablegung der europäischen Patentanwaltsprüfung gemäß Art. 134(2)(c) nicht zwingenderweise mit sich bringen."

22 Die vorgeschlagene Regel soll auch andere Fälle decken, wie offensichtlich aus dem Text abgeleitet werden kann, z.B. den Fall, daß ein Vertreter seinen Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz für eine bestimmte Zeit oder für immer in ein Land verlegt, das kein Vertragsland ist.

23 Die Beschränkung der Berechtigung zu vertreten, soll den Fall umfassen, daß ein Vertreter die Bedingung unter (b) nicht erfüllt. Die Beschränkung kann dann darin liegen, daß er nicht berechtigt ist, als Vertreter einzuschreiten, sondern seine Tätigkeit nur unter der finanziellen Verantwortlichkeit eines Arbeitgebers ausführen darf.

24 Eine wie oben vorgeschlagene Regel kann auch beim Verfahren um die Aufnahme in die Liste nützlich sein, und zwar im Hinblick darauf, daß kraft der Regel das Europäische Patentamt offensichtlich berechtigt wäre, vom Anmelder für eine Aufnahme eine Erklärung zu verlangen, daß er keine Umstände kennt, die das Europäische Patentamt zwingen würden, die Eintragung in die Liste gemäß Regel 108 zurückzuweisen.

25 Die vorgeschlagene Regel soll nur gewisse grundsätzliche Fälle decken, wo disziplinäre Maßnahmen von Anfang an als notwendig erachtet werden.

Vorschläge für Verbesserungen redaktioneller Art

26 In Art. 134(2)(b), französische Fassung, wird vorgeschlagen, zwischen ,,ou" und ,,son" einzusetzen ,,le lieu de".

27 Am Beginn des Art. 134(3) wird vorgeschlagen, in der englischen Fassung ,,Subject to Art. 144" anzufügen. (Entsprechende Verbesserungen sind auch in der deutschen und französischen Fassung durchzuführen.)

28 In der englischen Fassung des Art. 134(6) wird vorgeschlagen, die Worte ,,able within the said State to act as a professional representative in patent matters" zu ändern in ,entitled to act as a professional representative before the central industrial property office in that State". Der Grund für diesen Vorschlag liegt darin, daß der Ausdruck ,,legal practitioner" ziemlich unbestimmt erscheint.

29 In der französischen Fassung des Art. 162(1)(a) representative on the List provided for in Art. 134, paragraph 1, or shall delete or suspend him from the List, or restrict his entitlement, as the case may be. If at a later time the grounds for deletion, suspension or restriction of entitlement no longer apply, re-entry of the person on the List or lifting of the suspension or restriction of entitlement shall not be conditional upon the passing of the European Qualifying Examination provided for in Art. 134(2)(c)."

22 The proposed Rule is intended also to cover other situations, as will probably be seen from the text, e.g. the situation where a representative moves his place of business or employment for a limited period or forever to a state not among the Contracting States.

23 Restriction of the entitlement to represent is particularly intended to cover the situation where a representative does not fulfil the condition sub (b). The restriction might then be that he is entitled to act as a representative only under the financial responsibility of an employer.

24 A Rule as proposed might also be useful for the procedure of admission to the List, seeing that on the strength of the Rule the European Patent Office would probably be entitled to demand a declaration from an applicant for admission to the effect that he is aware of no circumstances that would compel the European Patent Office to refuse to enter him on the List under Rule 108.

25 The proposed Rule is intended only to cover some basic situations where disciplinary measures are believed to be necessary right from the beginning.

Proposals for Amendments of an Editorial Nature

26 In Art. 134(2)(b), French version, it is proposed to insert "le lieu de" between "ou" and "son".

27 At the beginning of Art. 134(3) it is proposed in the English version to add "Subject to Art. 144". (Corresponding amendments to be made in the German and French versions.)

28 In the English version of Art. 134(6) it is proposed to change "able within the said State to act as a professional representative in patent matters" to "entitled to act as a professional representative before the central industrial property office in that State". The reason for this proposal is that the term "legal practitioner" seems to be rather vague.

29 In the French version of Art. 162(1)(a) it is

Page 53

Sitzverlegungen von Vertretern, denen sie Bescheinigungen ausstellten, zu überwachen.

17 Es wird angenommen, daß durch die Regel 107 tatsächlich beabsichtigt war, Fälle zu erfassen, wonach ein Vertreter seine Vertretungsrechte vor dem nationalen Patentamt aus Gründen wie grob ungehörige Verhaltensweise, strafrechtliche Verurteilung oder Konkurs verliert. In diesem Lichte gesehen, scheint die Regel 107 annehmbar zu sein.

18 Die Möglichkeit, derartige disziplinäre Maßnahmen von der nationalen Ebene auf die europäische Ebene zu verlegen, besteht immerhin nicht mehr für Vertreter, die gemäß den endgültigen Bestimmungen des Art. 134 eingetragen wurden; weder die Artikel noch die Regeln des Vertrages sagen darüber irgend etwas aus. Tatsächlich hat es sogar den Anschein, daß eine Person das Recht haben würde, in die Liste eingetragen zu werden, wenn sie den Bedingungen des Art. 134(2) entspricht, auch dann, wenn sie sich in Konkurs befindet oder eines Verbrechens oder einer ungehörigen Verhaltensweise schuldig befunden wurde, minderjährig ist oder wahnsinnig erklärt wurde (Umstände, die nicht notwendigerweise ein Hindernis für das Bestehen der europäischen Patentanwaltsprüfung bilden müßten).

19 Dies ist offensichtlich nicht der beabsichtigte Sinn und es wurde innerhalb der FICPI diskutiert, ob es angezeigt wäre, einige weitere Bedingungen in Art. 134(2) anzufügen (der ursprünglich von der FICPI selbst formuliert worden war).

20 Nach weiteren Uberlegungen kam die FICPI zu dem Schluß, dem Art. 134(2) keine weiteren Bedingungen anzufügen, da es für einen Bewerber um Aufnahme schwierig sein könnte, Beweise über die obengenannten weiteren Bedingungen vorzulegen, und auch deshalb, weil es einfacher ist, solche Bedingungen anpaßbar zu machen, wenn sie in Form von durch Art. 134(7) gegebenen disziplinären Maßnahmen in den Regeln enthalten sind.

21 Es wird daher vorgeschlagen, eine neue Regel 108 folgen zu lassen, die etwa wie folgt lauten könnte:

,,Regel 108

Wenn ein Vertreter a) die Bedingungen des Art. 134(2)(a) und (b) vorbehaltlich Art. 134(5) oder Art. 162(1)(a) und (b) vorbehaltlich Art. 162(4a) nicht erfüllt oder b) nicht berechtigt ist, über sein Eigentum zu verfügen, oder c) in letzter Instanz eines Vergehens schuldig befunden wurde, das ihn für eine bestimmte Zeit oder für immer ungeeignet erscheinen läßt, ein Vertrauen zu genießen, wie dies einem Vertreter in Patentangelegenheiten zukommen sollte, representatives to whom they have furnished certificates.

17 It is presumed that Rule 107 is in fact intended to cover situations where a representative loses his right of representation before a national patent office for reasons such as grossly improper conduct, conviction of criminal offences, or bankruptcy. As seen in this light Rule 107 seems to be reasonable.

18 However, the possibility of projecting such disciplinary measures from the national level to the European level no longer exists for representatives who have been entered under the final provisions of Art. 134, and neither the Articles nor the Rules of the Convention put anything in their stead. In fact it even seems as if a person would have a right to be entered on the List if he fulfils the conditions of Art. 134(1), even if he is under bankruptcy or has been found guilty of a crime or of improper conduct, or is a minor, or even has been declared insane (which would not necessarily be an obstacle to the passing of the European Qualifying Examination).

19 This is probably not the intended meaning, and it has been discussed within the FICPI whether it would be appropriate to add some further conditions to Art. 134(1) (which has in fact originally been formulated by the FICPI itself).

20 On further consideration the FICPI has arrived at the conclusion that it would be preferable not to add further conditions to Art. 134(1), because it might be difficult for an applicant for admission to furnish proof of the further conditions mentioned above, and also because it will be easier to modify such further conditions if they are included in the Rules in the form of disciplinary measures warranted by Art. 134(7).

21 It is therefore proposed to add a new Rule 108 reading approximately as follows:

"Rule 108

If a representative (a) does not fulfil the conditions of Art. 134(2)(a) and (b) subject to Art. 134(5), or Art. 162(1)(a) and (b), subject to Art. 162(4a), or (b) is not entitled to dispose of his property, or (c) has been found guilty, without further recourse, of an offence making him unfit, for a limited period or forever, for the confidence which a representative in patent matters should enjoy, the European Patent Office shall refuse to enter the

Page 54

Vertretung vor nationalen Patentämtern, die europäische Patentanmeldungen für das Europäische Patentamt prüfen

10 Es wird vorgeschlagen, entweder dem Art. 134 oder dem Protokoll M/5 einen neuen Absatz etwa wie folgt anzufügen: „Alle Bestimmungen des Art. 133 und des Art. 134 betreffend die Vertretung oder das Einschreiten vor dem Europäischen Patentamt sollen auch auf die Vertretung oder das Einschreiten vor jedem nationalen Amt, das für das Europäische Patentamt die Prüfung von europäischen Patentanmeldungen durchführt, Anwendung finden, soweit es sich um derartige europäische Patentanmeldungen handelt. Absatz 4 des Art. 134 soll auch auf Vertragsstaaten Anwendung finden, in denen solche nationale Ämter bestehen."

11 Im Hinblick darauf, daß gemäß Dokument M/5 ein großer Teil der Prüfungsarbeit im Zusammenhang mit europäischen Patentanmeldungen für eine verhältnismäßig lange Zeit durch nationale Patentämter, die bestimmten Bedingungen entsprechen, durchzuführen sein könnten, erscheint eine derartige Bestimmung notwendig.

Streichung von Vertretern aus der Liste

12 Gemäß Regel 107 wird ein Vertreter, der in die Liste kraft einer durch das nationale Patentamt nach Art. 162 ausgestellten Bescheinigung eingetragen wurde, aus der Liste gestrichen, wenn der Vertreter die Voraussetzungen für das Ausstellen der Bescheinigung nicht oder nicht mehr erfüllt.

13 Die wichtigste Voraussetzung für das Ausstellen der Bescheinigung durch ein nationales Patentamt ist im Art. 162(1)(b) festgelegt, nämlich daß der Vertreter befugt sein muß, natürliche oder juristische Personen auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens vor dem in Frage stehenden Patentamt zu vertreten. In vielen Ländern ist die Berechtigung, vor dem nationalen Patentamt zu vertreten, durch einen Wohnsitz in dem in Frage stehenden Lande bedingt (dies ist tatsächlich oft die einzige Bedingung).

14 Soweit solche Länder in Betracht kommen, werden die für die Ausstellung einer Bescheinigung erforderlichen Bedingungen nicht mehr erfültt, wenn der Vertreter seinen Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz in einen anderen Vertragsstaat verlegt. Der Regel 107 liegt nun kaum die Absicht zugrunde, daß ein Vertreter unter diesen Umständen aus der Liste gestrichen werden sollte.

15 Um dies zu klären, wird vorgeschlagen, in die Regel 107, Zeile 4, zwischen ,,oder" und ,nicht" einzufügen ,,aus anderen Gründen als dem Wechsel des Geschäftssitzes oder Arbeitsplatzes".

16 Es wird auch darauf hingewiesen, daß man nationalen Patentämtern kaum zumuten kann, mögliche

Representation before National Patent Offices conducting Examination of European Patent Applications on behalf of the European Patent Office

10 It is proposed to add a new paragraph worded roughly as follows either to Art. 134 or to Protocol M/5: "All provisions of Art. 133 and Art. 134 regarding representation or action before the European Patent Office shall also apply to representation or action before any national office conducting examination of European patent applications on behalf of the European Patent Office, as far as such European patent applications are concerned. Paragraph 4 of Art. 134 shall also apply to Contracting States in which such national offices are located."

11 Such a provision seems to be necessary in view of the fact that under Document M/5 a large proportion of the examination work in connection with European patent applications may for a relatively long period be conducted by national patent offices fulfilling certain conditions.

Deletion of Representatives from the List

12 Under Rule 107 a representative who has been entered on the List on the strength of a certificate furnished by a national patent office under the provisions of Art. 162 shall be deleted from the List if the representative does not fulfil or has ceased to fulfil the conditions required for the grant of the certificate.

13 The main condition required for the grant of the certificate by a national patent office is that of Art. 162(1)(b), viz. that the representative must be entitled to represent natural or legal persons in patent matters before the patent office in question. In many countries the entitlement to represent before the national patent office is conditional upon domicile in the country in question (in fact that is frequently the only condition).

14 As far as such countries are concerned, the conditions required for the grant of the certificate will no longer be fulfilled if the representative moves his place of business or employment to another Contracting State. It is hardly the intended meaning of Rule 107 that a representative should be deleted from the List in these circumstances.

15 To clarify this point it is proposed to add in Rule 107, line 3 between "or" and "has" "for reasons other than change of place of business or employment".

16 It is also observed that national patent offices can hardly be expected to watch possible migrations of

Page 55

5 Die Berechtigung des Grundsatzes, erworbene Rechte zu schützen, wird nicht bezweifelt. Es wird allerdings die Frage aufgeworfen, ob die Ubergangsbestimmungen, die eine vollständige Ausnahme vom Erfordernis der Nationalität während der Ubergangszeit gewähren, nicht weitergehen als dies notwendig ist, um erworbene Rechte von Vertretern, die keine Nationalität eines Vertragsstaates besitzen, zu schützen. Da die Ubergangszeit auch mehr als fünf (5) Jahre von der Verlautbarung der Europäischen Patentkonvention an betragen kann, ist es denkbar, daß solche Vertreter erst nach einer Verlautbarung mit der Erwerbung derartiger Rechte beginnen könnten oder, mit anderen Worten, es könnten sich Vertreter außerhalb der Vertragsstaaten, die nicht die Nationalität eines Vertragsstaates besitzen, z.B. Mitglieder oder Angestellte großer Vereinigungen solcher Vertretungen, auf nationaler Basis als Vertreter in irgendeinem Vertragsstaat niederlassen, wo dies möglich ist, mit der gezielten Absicht, Rechte zu erwerben, um ihnen (den Vertretern) eine Eintragung in die Liste nach Art. 162(3) zu ermöglichen.

6 Da im Hinblick auf das Dokument M/8 die Absicht besteht, die Errichtung des europäischen Patenterteilungsverfahrens der Diplomatischen Konferenz in München unmittelbar folgend beginnen zu lassen, ohne auf Ratifikationen zu warten, dürfte es angezeigt erscheinen, das Datum der Unterzeichnung der Konvention als das Datum ihrer Verlautbarung in Betracht zu ziehen.

7 Auf Grund der obenstehenden Überlegungen werden die folgenden Vorschläge unterbreitet:

8 In Art. 162(1) wird vorgeschlagen, eine erste Bedingung wie folgt dazuzugeben: „(a) er muß Staatsangehöriger eines der Vertragsstaaten sein" und die gegenwärtigen Bedingungen (a) und (b) in (b) und (c) umzubenennen.

9 Im Art. 162 wird vorgeschlagen, zwischen den bestehenden Absätzen 4 und 5 einen Absatz einzusetzen wie folgt: „4 a Der Präsident des Europäischen Patentamts kann bei Vorliegen besonderer Umstände Ausnahmen vom Erfordernis nach Absatz 1(a) gewähren. Eine Ausnahme soll stets Personen gewährt werden, die auf Grund dieses Artikels um Eintragung ansuchen und die ihren Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz am 6. Oktober 1973 im Gebiet eines der Vertragsstaaten hatten und berechtigt waren, natürliche und juristische Personen in Patentsachen vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz dieses Vertragsstaates zu vertreten und deren Hauptbeschäftigung zu dieser Zeit darin bestand, als Vertreter vor der genannten Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz einzuschreiten."

5 The propriety of the principle of acquired rights is not questioned. The question is raised, however, whether the transitional provisions, in granting absolute exemption from the nationality requirement during the transitional period, do not go further than necessary in order to preserve acquired rights of representatives not having the nationality of a Contracing State. Since the transitional period may turn out to be more than five (5) years from the time when the European Patent Convention is proclaimed, it is imaginable that such representatives could start acquiring rights only after the proclamation, or in other words representatives outside the Contracting States and not having the nationality of a Contracting State, e.g. members or employees of large units of such representatives, could establish themselves as representatives on the national level in any of the Contracting States where this is possible, for the exact purpose of acquiring rights to enable them to be entered on the List under Art. 162(3).

6 Seeing that under Document M/8 it is the intention that the building up of the European patent system should be initiated immediately following the Munich Diplomatic Conference without awaiting ratifications, it would appear to be appropriate to regard the date of signing of the Convention as the date of its proclamation.

7 On the above premises the following proposals are presented for consideration:

8 In Art. 162(1) it is proposed to add a first condition as follows: "(a) he must be a national of one of the Contracting States" and to re-index present conditions (a) and (b) as (b) and (c) respectively.

9 In Art. 162 it is proposed to insert a new paragraph between existing paragraphs 4 and 5 reading as follows: "4 a The President of the European Patent Office may in special circumstances grant exemption from the requirement of paragraph 1(a). Exemption shall always be granted for persons who apply for entry under the provisions of this Article and who on October 6, 1973, had their places of business or employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States, and were intitled to represent natural or legal persons in patent matters before the central industrial property office of that Contracting State, and whose main occupation at the time in question was that of acting as representatives before the said central industrial property office."

Page 56

che Fragen anzuschneiden. Allerdings werden zu einigen wenigen Punkten Bemerkungen gemacht, die von untergeordneter Bedeutung sein können, worüber aber weitere Diskussionen doch nützlich sein könnten.

Sitz in einem Vertragsstaat gemäß Art. 133

2 Während sich Art. 133(2) auf ,natürliche und juristische Personen bezieht, die weder (einen) Wohnsitz noch Sitz in einem Vertragsstaat haben", betrifft Art. 133(3) im ersten und zweiten Satz natürliche und juristische Personen mit (ihrem) Wohnsitz oder Sitz (Geschäftssitz) in einem Vertragsstaat . . . Keiner dieser Ausdrücke scheint sehr genau zu sein, aber insbesondere der vorerwähnte könnte dahingehend gedeutet werden, daß eine Gesellschaft, die nicht in einem Vertragsstaat ansässig ist, irgendeine Zweigniederlassung oder Tochtergesellschaft in einem Vertragsstaat gründet, wobei dann die Muttergesellschaft direkt mit dem Europäischen Patentamt verkehren könnte.

3 Es wird daher vorgeschlagen, wenigstens das Wort „ihrem" (,their", „leur") durchwegs an allen drei Stellen des Ausdruckes „Sitz" (Geschäftssitz) anzunehmen oder vorzugsweise eine präzisere Formulierung zu wählen, wie z.B.

Art. 133(2)

,(2) Natürliche Personen, die keinen Wohnsitz im Gebiet eines Vertragsstaates haben, und juristische Personen, die gemäß den Gesetzen eines der Vertragsstaaten nicht protokolliert sind, müssen . . ".

Art. 133(3)

,(3) Natürliche Personen, die einen Wohnsitz im Gebiet eines Vertragsstaates haben, und juristische Personen, die gemäß den Gesetzen eines der Vertragsstaaten protokolliert sind die gemäß den Gesetzen eines der Vertragsstaaten protokolliert sind und die wirtschaftliche Verbindungen mit ihr haben, handeln können."

Erfordernis der Nationalität eines Vertragsstaates

4 Unter den endgültigen Bestimmungen des Art. 134 ist die Nationalität eines Vertragsstaates eine Voraussetzung für die Eintragung in die in Art. 134(1) vorgesehene Liste (mit der Möglichkeit von Ausnahmen in besonders gelagerten Fällen). Für die Übergangsbestimmungen des Art. 162 liegt kein solches Erfordernis vor. Der Grund für diese Unterscheidung liegt zweifellos darin, daß eine allgemeine Befreiung vom Erfordernis der Nationalität während der Übergangszeit für den Schutz erworbener Rechte als notwendig angesehen wurde.

However, some observations will be made on a few points which may be of secondary importance, but on which further discussion may still be useful.

Registered Place of Business under Art. 133

2 While Art. 133(2) refers to "natural and legal persons not having either a residence or registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States", Art. 133(3) refers, in both first and second sentence, to natural and legal persons having their residence or registered place of business... Neither of these expressions seems to be very precise, but particularly the former could be interpreted to mean that if a Company not domiciled in a Contracting State establishes any form of branch office or subsidiary in a Contracting State, the parent Company could deal directly with the European Patent Office.

3 It is therefore suggested, as a minimum, to adopt the word "their" ("ihr", "leur") consistently at all three occurrences of "registered place of business", but preferably to adopt a still more precise wording such as

Art. 133(2)

"(2) Natural persons not having a residence within the territory of one of the Contracting States, and legal persons not incorporated under the laws of one of the Contracting States must be . . .".

Art. 133(3)

"(3) Natural persons having a residence within the territory of one of the Contracting States, and legal persons incorporated under the laws of one of the Contracting States which are incorporated under the laws of one of the Contracting States and which have economic links with the first legal person."

Requirement of Nationality of a Contracting State

4 Under the final provisions of Art. 134 nationality of a Contracting State is a condition for the entry of a representative on the List provided for in Art. 134(1) (with the possibility of exemption in special circumstances). Under the transitional provisions of Art. 162 there is no such requirement. The reason for this distinction no doubt is that a general exemption from the nationality requirement during the transitional period has been found necessary in order to preserve acquired rights.

FICPI

Fédération Internationale des Conseils en Propriéte Industrielle

COMMENTS BY

FICPI Fédération Internationale des Conseils en Propriété Industrielle

PRISE DE POSITION DE LA

FICPI Fédération Internationale des Conseils en Propriété Industrielle

Page 58

das Wort „sofortige Beschwerde" eine bestimmte, hier nicht passende technische Bedeutung hat.

29 Außerdem wird angeregt zu prüfen, ob Satz 2 nicht mit Rücksicht auf Artikel 107 Satz 1 entbehrlich ist.

Artikel 116

30 In Absatz 1 Buchstabe g ist die „Abgabe einer eidesstattlichen Versicherung" als Beweismittel genannt. Nach informellen Gesprächen mit der britischen Delegation handelt es sich jedoch bei dem im englischen Text stehenden „sworn statement in writings" um eine Erklärung, die vor einer zuständigen Stelle unter Eid abgegeben wird. Die deutsche Fassung von Buchstabe g sollte daher lauten: „die Abgabe einer schriftlichen Erklärung, die unter Eid abgegeben worden ist".

Artikel 134

31 a) Aus Gründen der Klarheit erscheint es zweckmäßig, in Anlehnung an die englische Fassung den Begriff des ,zugelassenen Vertreters" durch den des ,,geschäftsmäßigen Vertreters" zu ersetzen.

32 b) In Absatz 1 sollte ein Vorbehalt mit Rücksicht auf Absatz 6 gemacht werden, da die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt auch von jedem Rechtsanwalt, der die erforderlichen Voraussetzungen erfullt, wahrgenommen werden kann.

33 c) Absatz 3 sollte gestrichen werden, da er neben Absatz 1 entbehrlich zu sein scheint.

Artikel 138

34 Im deutschen Text sollte in Absatz 1 Buchstabe b das Wort „danach" in Anpassung an Artikel 81 gestrichen werden.

Regel 29

35 Im deutschen Text von Absatz 1 Satz 1 sollte das Wort „festzulegen" durch ,,anzugeben" ersetzt werden. since the term "sofortige Beschwerde" has a specific technical meaning which is not appropriate here.

29 In addition it should be examined whether the 2 nd sentence is really necessary in view of the 1st sentence of Article 107.

Article 116

30 In the German text of paragraph 1(g) "Abgabe einer eidesstattlichen Versicherung" is referred to as a means of giving or obtaining evidence. Informal discussions with the United Kingdom delegation have, however, established that the "sworn statements in writing" referred to in the English text are statements made under oath before a competent authority. The German version of (g) should therefore read: "die Abgabe einer schriftlichen Erklärung, die unter Eid abgegeben worden ist".

Article 134

31 (a) In the interests of clarity it would appear desirable to replace in the German version the term "zugelassene Vertreter" by "geschäftsmäßige Vertreter" (professional representatives) along the lines of the English version.

32 (b) Paragraph 1 should state that its provisions are subject to the provisions of paragraph 6 , since representation before the European Patent Office may be undertaken by any legal practitioner fulfilling the necessary requirements.

33 (c) Paragraph 3 should be deleted since it seems unnecessary in addition to paragraph 1.

Article 138

34 In the German text the word "danach" in paragraph 1(b) should be deleted, to correspond with Article 81.

Rule 29

35 In the German text of the 1^st sentence of paragraph 1 the word "festzulegen" should be replaced by "anzugeben".

Artikel 48

5 Es besteht keine Notwendigkeit, in Buchstabe f zum Ausdruck zu bringen, daß die Einsetzung eines Haushalts- und Finanzausschusses im Ermessen des Verwaltungsrats steht. Daher sollten die Worte ,,gegebenenfalls einzusetzenden" durch ,,eingesetzten" ersetzt werden.

Artikel 134

6 Es kann nicht ausgeschlossen werden, daß in Einzelfällen Personen, die in die Liste der beim Europäischen Patentamt zugelassenen Vertreter eingetragen sind und in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland oder in den Niederlanden einen Geschäftssitz begründet haben (Abs. 4 und Abs. 6 in Verbindung mit Abs. 4), wiederholt und in schwerwiegender Weise gegen die Gesetze des Gastlandes verstoßen. Hierfür sollte die Zuständigkeit der Behörden des Gastlandes begründet werden, da die Behörden des Heimatlandes dieser Personen nicht in ausreichendem Maße in der Lage sein werden, Untersuchungen über Vorkommnisse im Gastland durchzuführen. Es muß die Möglichkeit geschaffen werden, daß diesen Personen die nach Absatz 4 eingeräumte Befugnis, einen Geschäftssitz zu begründen, entzogen wird. Es wird daher vorgeschlagen, folgenden Absatz 8 aufzunehmen: „Hat eine in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter eingetragene Person wiederholt oder in grober Weise gegen die Gesetze der Bundesrepublik Deutschland oder der Niederlande verstoßen, so sind die zuständigen Stellen dieser Staaten nach Anhörung des Präsidenten des Europäischen Patentamts berechtigt, dieser Person die Befugnis, einen Geschäftssitz aufgrund von Absatz 4 zu begründen, zu entziehen."

Artikel 162

7 Nach Auffassung der Bundesregierung kommt in Absatz 7 nicht hinreichend deutlich zum Ausdruck, daß Personen, die nach Absatz 6 nur beschränkt vertretungsbefugt sind, nach dem Ende der Ubergangszeit ohne Ablegung der europäischen Eignungsprüfung unbeschränkt zur Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt berechtigt sein sollen, wenn die bisher bestehende Beschränkung erst nach dem Ende der Ubergangszeit wegfällt. Es wird daher vorgeschlagen, Absatz 7 wie folgt neu zu fassen: „Die aufgrund Absatz 1 in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter eingetragenen Personen sind auch nach dem Ende der Ubergangszeit in dem bisher bestehenden Umfang zur Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt berechtigt, ohne daß sie die europäische Eignungsprüfung nach Artikel 134 Absatz 2 Buchstabe c abgelegt haben, selbst wenn sie nicht Angehörige eines Vertragsstaats sind. Wird durch eine Bescheinigung der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz nachgewiesen, daß eine nach Absatz 6 nur beschränkt vertretungsbe-

5 There is no need to state in sub-paragraph (f) that the Administrative Council has powers to set up a Budget and Finance Committee. The words "which may be set up" should therefore be replaced by "set up".

Article 134

6 The possibility cannot be ruled out that in a few instances persons entered in the list of professional representatives recognised by the European Patent Office and who have established a place of business in the Federal Republic of Germany or in the Netherlands (paragraph 4 and paragraph 6 in conjunction with paragraph 4) may repeatedly and seriously infringe the laws of the host State. Provision should be made for the authorities of the host State to have competence to deal with such cases since the authorities of the country of origin will not be sufficiently able to carry out investigations concerning events in the host State. It must therefore be possible to deprive such persons of the right, accorded them under paragraph 4 , to establish a place of business. It is therefore proposed that the following paragraph 8 be adopted: "If a person whose name appears on the list of professional representatives repeatedly or seriously infringes the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany or of the Netherlands, the competent authorities of these States shall be authorised, after consulting the President of the European Patent Office, to deprive such person of the right to establish a place of business pursuant to paragraph 4."

Article 162

7 In the opinion of the German Government paragraph 7 does not state sufficiently clearly that persons who, pursuant to paragraph 6 , may only act as professional representatives subject to certain limitations, shall be entitled to act as professional representatives before the European Patent Office without being subject to any limitations after the expiry of the transitional period without their having to take the European qualifying examination, if the previous limitations only cease to apply after the expiry of the transitional period. It is therefore proposed that paragraph 7 should be re-worded as follows: "Persons, whose names are entered, pursuant to paragraph 1 , on the list of professional representatives shall continue to be entitled to act as professional representatives before the European Patent Office after the expiry of the transitional period to the extent to which they were previously entitled to do so, without having to take the European qualifying examination under Article 134, para-

STELLUNGNAHME

DER REGIERUNG DER BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND

PRISE DE POSITION

DU GOUVERNEMENT DE LA RÉPUBLIQUE FÉDÉRALE D'ALLEMAGNE

MÜNCHNER DIPLOMATISCHE KONFERENZ

ÜBER DIE EINFÜHRUNG EINES EUROPÄISCHEN PATENTERTEILUNGSVERFAHRENS 1973 (München, 10. September bis 6. Oktober 1973)

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS, 1973 (Munich, 10 September to 6 October 1973)

CONFÉRENCE DIPLOMATIQUE DE MUNICH

POUR L'INSTITUTION D'UN SYSTÈME EUROPÉEN DE DÉLIVRANCE DE BREVETS (1973) (Munich, 10 septembre - 6 octobre 1973)

STELLUNGNAHMEN

zu den vorbereitenden Dokumenten herausgegeben von der Regierung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

COMMENTS

on the preparatory documents published by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany

PRISES DE POSITION sur les documents préparatoires publiées par le Gouvernement de la République fédérale d'Allemagne

Page 62

provision was also adopted to authorise the national authorities of the host country to withdraw the right to a place of business for reasons of "ordre public".

(d) Deletion from the list of professional representatives

The Main Committee examined the grounds for deletion of professional representatives from the list and re-arranged them in Rules 103 (permanent solution) and 107 (transitional period). No difficulties were presented by the three grounds for deletion which apply both in the transitional period and in the permanent solution, namely, death or legal incapacity of the representative, his ceasing to be a national of one of the Contracting States, where the President does not grant or is not required to grant exemption from this requirement, or his ceasing to have a place of business or employment in any of the Contracting States. There was unanimous agreement that, in respect of representatives during a transitional period, the national central industrial property office in question must, in these three cases, withdraw the certificate which it has issued and the representative must be deleted from the list. There was, however, disagreement as to whether the mere surrender of the place of business in the State in which the certificate was granted should result in the withdrawal of the certificate, if the representative establishes another place of business in another Contracting State. The Committee's answer was in the negative. The majority adopted the viewpoint that it would be unfair and unjustifiable to make representation before the European Patent Office during a transitional period dependent on a merely national requirement of any State that the place of business should be within its territory. This restriction on the national central industrial property offices was incorporated in Rule 107 relating to the transitional period, while at the same time it was laid down that the national offices could withdraw the certificate, apart from on one of the three above-mentioned grounds, pursuant to other conditions of national law and, in particular, on disciplinary grounds.

Subject to these limitations, representatives entered on the list during the transitional period will, throughout this period, be required to have a certificate issued by the national central industrial property office of a Contracting State. This requirement will, however, cease to apply on the expiry of the transitional period after which the certificate will be devoid of all effect. Thus, representatives during the transitional period and representatives newly authorised after having taken the European qualifying examination will have equal status under the permanent solution. Both kinds of representative will therefore be subject to the disciplinary power decided upon by the Administrative Council pursuant to Article 134, paragraph 7(c); in order to avoid a situation where there would be no disciplinary supervision, the disciplinary power should begin to apply not later than on the expiry of the transitional period.

The Main Committee also remedied other defects in Rules 103 and 107 by including in them provisions laying down that, when the ground for deletion no longer obtains, a representative deleted from the list may be re-entered on it.

13. Conversion procedure (Articles 135-137/Rule 104)

Article 135, paragraph 1, sets out the grounds for the conversion of a forfeited European patent application into a national application. It was proposed to delete the possibilities for conversion under the national laws of the Contracting States in paragraph 1(b). It was maintained that, firstly, Articles 120 and 121 protected the applicant sufficiently against the consequences of omissions and, secondly, that there were no grounds to justify pursuit at national level of European patent applications refused or European patents revoked on material grounds. The principal objection raised against this proposal for deletion was that it was a matter for the national laws whether conversion should be permissible in cases other than those compulsorily prescribed, i. e. in cases where national law provided for forms of protection such as utility models, the grant of which was conditional on less exacting requirements than those applicable to the grant of patents for invention. The great majority of the Committee subsequently rejected the proposal, so that the existing solution was retained.

14. Revocation and prior rights (Articles 138-139)

With regard to the grounds on which, pursuant to Article 138, a European patent may be revoked, the Main Committee made it clear that extension of the protection conferred can be a ground for revocation, irrespective of whether the extension occurs during opposition proceedings or national proceedings. This clarification takes account of the fact that a change in the claims of a European patent during national revocation proceedings or during national proceedings for partial surrender may result in an inadmissible extension of protection. Moreover, the Committee refused to impose, in paragraph 2 of the same Article, any restrictions on national laws in respect of the form in which limitations of European patent claims can be made in cases of partial revocation.

A further proposal, in connection with the rules laid down in Article 139 governing the relationship between European and national patents, to provide that, in cases of collision, the European patent should always take precedence was also unsuccessful. The Committee, by a great majority, rejected this solution which would have been a further step towards adopting a maximum solution, principally in the belief that, in the interests of flexibility, the national laws of the Contracting States should be left to adopt such collision rules as they considered justified.

15. Relationship between the Convention and the PCT (Articles 150-157/Rules 105-106)

The Main Committee re-examined the provisions of Articles 150-157, linking the Convention and the Patent Cooperation Treaty/PCT, i. e., the provisions governing the procedure for international applications which are the subject of proceedings before the European Patent Office. In the course of this examination, it remedied the remaining defects and, where necessary, removed discrepancies between the provisions of the Convention and those of the PCT.

With regard to material content, the amendment made by the Main Committee to Article 157 concerning the effects of the publication of the international application on proceedings before the European Patent Office should be noted. A consequence of the previous text of paragraph 1, according to which publication of the international application by the International Bureau of WIPO takes the place of the publication of a European patent application, would have been that, in each case, the published international application would have formed part of the state of the art, pursuant to Article 52, paragraph 3. This legal consequence was regarded as unjustified where an application, which has not been published in an official language of the European Patent Office, is withdrawn before its communication to the European Patent Office. Therefore, the Committee, after a thorough examination of the relevant provisions of the PCT, decided by a large majority to take account of this case by providing that an international application published pursuant to Article 21 of the

Page 63

that Article 156, paragraph 3, was to be interpreted as an authorisation for the Administrative Council to provide for the levy of a search fee for each and every international patent application, irrespective of whether additional searches within the meaning of this provision should be carried out in the individual cases.

11. Information to the public of official authorities, legal and administrative co-operation (Articles 127-132, Rules 93-100)

Only a few amendments were made to these provisions. The inspection of files under Article 128 was supplemented so as to provide more precise information for the general public; thus, before the publication of the European patent application, not only the date of filing may be made known to third parties, but also the date, State and file number of any application of which the priority is claimed. The provisions of Articles 130/132 were drafted more generally so that the European Patent Office could make agreements concerning exchanges of information and exchanges of publications not only with States which were not a party to the Convention and with international patent granting authorities, such as WIPO, but also with any other organisations, especially documentation centres such as INPADOC. It was also specified at the same time that the substantive content of applications which had not yet been published could not be the subject of such exchanges of information. In addition, the Administrative Council was authorised in Article 130, paragraph 3, to make provisions in respect of exchanges of information with the last-named organisations which derogated from the restrictions on the inspection of files, in so far as the confidential treatment of the information was guaranteed.

While dealing with the provisions of Article 131, the Main Committee discussed a proposal which, in the light of the procedure laid down in the Protocol on Recognition, aimed to supplement the prescribed legal co-operation between the European Patent Office and the Contracting States by an obligation for the Contracting States to provide legal assistance amongst themselves. This interesting idea was rejected generally because the proposed extension was considered to be an intrusion into international legal aid between Contracting States and also an obligation which far exceeded the purpose of the Convention. A further idea to allow the European Patent Office to intervene as an international notification authority in certain proceedings concerning European patents, also found little approval.

12. Representation (Articles 133-134, 162/Rules 101-103, 107)

The provisions of the Convention and the Implementing Regulations concerning representation before the European Patent Office were already discussed with the organisations concerned during the earlier stages of the negotiations and were, as far as possible adapted to their proposals and wishes. Fortunately this situation meant that the principles established by the Inter-Governmental Conference were no longer questioned as to their substance. In particular, the principle that during a transitional period the representatives' status would basically be controlled by the national law of Contracting States and afterwards by European law, remained uncontested. The general principles concerning representation in Article 133 were also unchanged. The Main Committee generally considered that these principles should also be valid for the transitional period. The Committee also specified that legal persons could be represented not only by their employees - as laid down in paragraph 3 of Article 133 - but also by their departments. Such representation by their departments is regarded as a matter of course, is understood from paragraph 1 of Article 133 and does not need to be expressly laid down.

However, material for discussion was provided by the following points: the uninterrupted change from the transitional period to the permanent arrangements, in particular with reference to the continued effects of national requirements, the reasons for the deletion of professional representatives from the list, questions concerning place of business and other individual problems. The following is a report on the main questions:

(a) Conditions of admission

The Main Committee again discussed the question raised in the earlier negotiations concerning possession of the nationality of a Contracting State as a condition of entry on the list of professional representatives. The majority concluded that this condition should be laid down in Article 162 not only in respect of the permanent solution, but also in respect of the transitional period, in order to avoid the improper acquisition of representation rights after the publication of the Convention. The status quo was taken into account in so far that failure to have the nationality of a Contracting State would not prevent entry on the list, if the representative had a place of business or employment and the right of representation in a Contracting State on 5 October 1973, i. e. at the time of the signing of the Convention.

(b) Restrictions on authorisation to represent

The question arose as to whether restrictions on representation arising from national law should also be valid in respect of proceedings before the European Patent Office during the transitional period. The Committee unanimously considered that such restrictions based on specific rules of national law, in particular on the legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany, are not justified in respect of European proceedings. The corresponding provisions of Article 162, paragraphs 2 and 6 , were therefore deleted.

(c) Questions concerning place of business

Article 134 provided that the representatives entered on the list were entitled to establish a place of business in the Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands for the purpose of practising their profession before the European Patent Office. In view of proceedings before national authorities carrying out duties on behalf of the European Patent Office, as provided for in the Protocol on Centralisation, the Main Committee supplemented Article 134 accordingly. Professional representatives should consequently also be able to establish a place of business in the Contracting States concerned. There was also discussion of a provision which would have expressly granted the right to practise a profession to a professional representative, his associates, employees and colleagues and the right of establishment to these persons including their families. It was said in reply to the advocates of such a provision, who considered it to be a necessary adjunct to the right of residence, that this would be to bring a "foreign body" into the Convention and might possibly conflict with existing agreements in the field of public law. The Committee thereupon rejected the proposed supplement, but noted on the other hand that the stipulated right to a place of business in accordance with Article 134, paragraphs 3 and 4, would be meaningful only if its recognition were dealt with sensibly. A

REPORT

by Mr. Paul Braendli, Lic. iur. Vice-Director of the Federal Intellectual Property Office (Switzerland) on the results of Main Committee I's proceedings

REPORT

by Mr. R. Bowen Assistant Comptroller, British Patent Office on the results of Main Committee II's proceedings

REPORT

by Mr. Fressonnet Deputy Director of the Institut National de la Propriété Industrielle (France) on the results of Main Committee III's proceedings

REPORT

by Mr. A. Fernandez Mazarambroz Head of the Spanish Patent Office on the results of the Credentials Committee's proceedings with regard to full powers for signing the Convention

Page 65

(M/125), whereby the new paragraph 8 would be removed and the following two sentences added to paragraph 4: "The powers of the authorities of the host State to close a place of business pursuant to the legal provisions relating to public safety and 'ordre public', shall not be affected. Before such a measure is taken, the President of the European Patent Office shall be consulted". 825. This proposal was supported by the Swiss and Swedish delegations. 826. The United Kingdom delegation was favourably inclined to the principle underlying this proposal as it felt that provision must be made to authorise the Member States concerned to withdraw the right to set up a place of business within their territory in the event of misconduct. However, as regards the actual draft submitted by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany, the United Kingdom delegation said that it preferred the original text submitted by that delegation, whereby the authorities of the host State would be empowered to withdraw the right after consulting the President of the European Patent Office. 827. The Chairman pointed out that these two texts differed in that the United Kingdom delegation's proposal made no reference to national law but incorporated in the Convention a provision entitling the host country to withdraw the right to set up a place of business if certain conditions were fulfilled. 828. The French delegation envinced certain misgivings as regards the proposal by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany on the grounds that it appeared to introduce a form of discrimination between nationals of the host country and nationals from other Contracting States. Its misgivings were even mor marked as regards the United Kingdom delegation's proposal, as the sanction involved would follow directly from the Convention. 829. The Netherlands delegation pointed out that its objections to the initial proposal by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany had been serious, and that consequently it was obliged to come out against the proposal by the United Kingdom delegation. There seemed to be no case for embodying in the Convention special provisions governing the withdrawal of the right to set up a place of business, as such provisions could prove to be at variance with extant national or international regulations on the matter. This delegation was, however, able to agree to the latest proposal by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany. 830. The FICPI delegation pointed out that, at least so far as the initial period was concerned, most professional representatives would have only very limited possibilities of setting up a place of business elsewhere than in their country of origin, inasmuch as a number of national regulations stipulated that if they did so they would lose their status under national law. Accordingly, it felt that there was a shortcoming in the Convention, which should afford professional representatives every possibility of moving within the Contracting States without thereby incurring the risk of losing their national status. 831. In reply to these comments, the Chairman pointed out that the Convention could only offer professional representatives the possibility of setting up a place of business in a Contracting State in which proceedings took place before the European Patent Office. It was not for the Convention to interfere in national law in those cases where States placed certain restrictions on setting up a place of business elsewhere than within their territory. It would be incumbent upon the various States, once the Convention had been ratified, to amend national regulations which militated against the establishment of a place of business in another Contracting State. 832. The Committee agreed to the proposal by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany by a majority of ten to one, with two abstentions.

Article 135 - Request for the application of national procedure

833. The Main Committee referred to the Drafting Committee a drafting proposal by the Netherlands delegation concerning the first sentence of paragraph 1(M/32, point 21). 834. The CEIF delegation suggested that it be made clear in the first sentence that the applicant could convert his European application into several parallel national applications (see M/22, point 7). 835. This proposal, which was supported by the French and Belgian delegations, was referred to the Drafting Committee for examination. 836. The CEIF delegation also proposed that it should be made clear in paragraph I(a) that in case of conversions reference should be made to the stage reached in the procedure on the date of the request for conversion as opposed to the date of filing of the application (See M/22, point 8). 837. The Netherlands delegation assumed that national patent offices would have at their disposal all the documents relating to the European procedure so that the CEIF request would naturally be satisfied; it thus felt that it was not necessary to amend paragraph 1(a). 838. The French delegation, supported by the Belgian delegation, requested the deletion of paragraph 1(b), which gave the applicant for or proprietor of a European patent the option of applying a national grant procedure where a European patent application was refused or withdrawn or was deemed to be withdrawn in cases other than those specified in paragraph 1(a), or where the European patent was revoked (M/26, points 17 and 18). It argued that such a provision was unnecessary since Articles 120 and 121 (121 and 122) could provide a remedy where there had been an failure to observe a time limit either as a result of negligence or of force majeure. Where, however, a European patent application was refused or a European patent was revoked on grounds based on the application of European substantive law, it would be pointless to apply a national procedure. In States which granted examined patents the patent would presumably be refused on the same grounds as in the case of the European Patent Office, whilst in States which granted registered patents a patent would have to be granted and this could only be disadvantageous. 839. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany opposed this request. It pointed out that the application of a national procedure should be possible not only in cases in which the applicant suffered a loss of rights as a result of the omission of an act but also where the European Patent Office had given a negative decision. It was in precisely these cases that there was a constitutional problem in the Federal Republic of Germany. The Basic Law required that every administrative act should be capable of being examined by a court. The Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office, although similar to courts of law, were not in fact courts proper so that the possibility of recourse to a German Court had to be maintained. It should, however, be borne in mind that the Federal Republic did not at present intend to avail itself of the option available under paragraph 1(b). However, even if this option were applied, there would be little danger of any delay in the procedure since it was unlikely that proceedings would be initiated before the German patent authorities and the German Court after the European procedure had been concluded. 840. The United Kingdom delegation was also in favour of retaining the option provided for in paragraph 1(b). It wished

Page 66

pointed out that the purpose of its proposal was to introduce a provision which would very probably apply only in a very limited number of cases. The provisions as they stood at present afforded not only patent agents but also lawyers the possibility of representing their clients before the European Patent Office. Since cases of misconduct, and, in certain instances, infringement of national laws could be ruled out, it should be possible to deprive the person concerned of the right to establish a place of business. The original proposal by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany as contained in M/11 provided that the competent authorities of the State concerned should be authorised, after consulting the President of the European Patent Office, to withdraw the right to establish a place of business within its territory. After due consideration the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany now felt that it was preferable that this power be vested in the President of the Office himself. In addition, the German delegation felt that it should be possible to appeal to the Board of Appeal against decisions by the President of the European Patent Office. 810. The Chairman noted that the proposal submitted by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany now ran as follows: "If a person whose name appears on the list of professional representatives or a person referred to in paragraph 6 repeatedly or seriously infringes the laws of one of the States in which European proceedings take place, the President of the European Patent Office shall be empowered to deprive such person of the right to establish a place of business in accordance with paragraph 4 or paragraph 6 . An appeal shall lie to the Board of Appeal from decisions by the President of the European Patent Office."

The Chairman felt that in view of the amendments made to the original proposal, the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany should be asked to submit a written proposal and that the Committee's work on the matter should be adjourned. 811. At a later meeting the Committee examined the proposal for a new paragraph 8 submitted by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany (see M/122). This proposal stated that: "If a person who has established a place of business in another Contracting State in accordance with paragraph 4 or paragraph 6 repeatedly or seriously infringes the laws of the host State, the President of the European Office shall be authorised to deprive such person, at the request of the authorities of the host State, of the right to establish a place of business in that State." 812. The Swiss delegation could agree with the principle of this proposal, but felt that as in the majority of such cases the actions involved would be subject to criminal law, it would be preferable for the national authorities, rather than the President of the European Patent Office, to be authorised to withdraw the right to establish a place of business. For this reason the Swiss delegation proposed an amendment whereby the President of the European Patent Office would be bound to withdraw such rights if so requested by the competent authorities of the host State. 813. The Netherlands delegation failed to see the need for such a provision as each Member State had its own corpus of criminal law, and as the relevant professional organisations in the Member States had their own disciplinary measures. 814. The French and Belgian delegations endorsed the opinion expressed by the Netherlands delegation. 815. The United Kingdom delegation considered that a provision of this nature would in all likelihood be superfluous, but that if it were adopted, the amendment proposed by the Swiss delegation should be incorporated as these problems involved considerations of national sovereignty. 816. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany re-emphasised that it should be borne in mind that the rules under consideration would affect a quite considerable number of persons, that is to say not only patent agents but lawyers as well. All these persons would be granted the right to establish themselves in those States where the departments of the European Patent Office would be located. While not wishing in any way to malign these professional groups, experience had shown that misconduct was always possible. Accordingly, it was essential that a State be empowered to take action in such cases. This possibility was not afforded by the texts as they stood at present, inasmuch as representatives would be granted an absolute right to establish a place of business. It was therefore indispensable that a provision of the type proposed authorising the State to take the necessary measures be incorporated in the text. As regards the question of who should be empowered to withdraw the right, the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany had considered that the Committee would favour the President of the European Patent Office. If this were not so, the German delegation was prepared to take up again its original proposal that this power be invested in the authorities of the host State. 817. The French delegation put it to the German delegation that perhaps Article 134, paragraph 7, already contained the provisions desired. The disciplinary power exercised by the bodies referred to in that paragraph should also comprise the possibility of deleting representatives from the list of professional representatives if they repeatedly or seriously infringed the laws of the State in question. 818. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany had intended to lay down less stringent measures to cover such cases. Whereas the French delegation favoured deletion from the list, the German delegation had taken as its premise that where the law of the State concerned had been infringed, the sole action taken would be to withdraw the right to establish a place of business, without involving the question of deletion from the list. 819. The Italian delegation concurred with the views expressed by the French delegation. 820. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany drew the attention of the Committee to the fact that Article 48 (3) of the Treaty of Rome provided for limitations justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. The German delegation had not called for similar provisions to be incorporated in the Convention on the grounds that professional representatives should not be faced with excessive, difficulty in establishing a place of business in the host State. This did not, however, mean that the host State was to be deprived of all possibility of withdrawing the right to set up a place of business in cases of misconduct. 821. The Swiss delegation asked whether the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany could agree to a provision authorising the Contracting States to lay down provisions under national law governing the withdrawal of the right to set up a place of business in the circumstances referred to in the German delegation's proposal. Although it would be a mere affirmation of fact, this provision, which could be incorporated in Article 134, would have the advantage of making it clear that the right to have a place of business within the meaning of Article 134 was not absolute. 822. The Netherlands delegation preferred a solution of this nature to the proposal made by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany. 823. The Chairman called upon the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany to submit o new proposal which would take account of the Committee's discussions. 824. At a later meeting the Committee examined the new proposal by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany

Page 67

for setting up house and working. Such reasonable possibilities comprised the right to a private residence for the representative and his family and the right to a work permit for those assistants which the representative required for the purposes of his profession. To this extent the CEIF delegation could endorse the compromise solution put forward by the Chair. 790. The FICPI delegation endorsed the comments made by the UNION delegation and suggested that the following phrase be added to the end of the text proposed by the French delegation: "their profession within the context of this Convention". 791. The French delegation pointed out that it had endeavoured to take account of a number of aspects in its proposal. The first of these was to ensure that professional representatives and their assistants were entitled to have a residence and exercise their profession. The second related to members of the families of such persons. It was clear that national laws on the right of establishment would have to be taken into account. The French delegation was therefore prepared to amend its original proposal using two sentences. The first sentence would cover professional representatives, their associates and assistants, who should be entitled to reside and exercise their profession within the territory of the Contracting States. The second of these sentences would deal with the situation of members of the families of these persons by granting them the right to reside and exercise their profession subject to national law, and in particular national provisions governing the right of establishment. 792. The Luxembourg delegation pointed out that if the French delegation's proposal were accompanied by a reference to national laws on the right of establishment, the proposal would find no practical application, inasmuch as the first part of the provision would grant the right to exercise the profession whereas the next sentence would stipulate that national laws on establishment would prevail. 793. The French delegation first of all pointed out that the text of this Article as it now stood already included a provision on the right of establishment and it was therefore unable to understand why certain delegations considered that a provision of this nature was out of place in the Convention. Secondly, with reference to the comments made by the Luxembourg delegation, the French delegation held that the provision was certainly not self-defeating in view of the fact that the first part of its proposal was intended to make provision for the right to side and exercise the profession, but did not state that such right was subject to national laws on the right of establishment. The reference to national law occured in the second sentence and concerned only the members of the families of professional representatives. The French delegation added that it might be prepared to relinquish the second part of the proposal provided that the discussions on the matter were explicitly mentioned in the Minutes of the Conference. 794. The Chairman noted that the French delegation's proposal as it now stood following the amendments read as follows: "professional representatives, their associates and employees shall have the unrestricted right to reside and exercise their profession within the said States". 795. The United Kingdom delegation suggested that this proposal be amended by adding the following phrase at the end: "exercise their profession in industrial property matters". 796. The Swedish delegation, speaking on behalf of the four Nordic countries, stated that these countries would prefer the matter not to be dealt with under this Convention but to be determined by the President of the European Patent Office in the headquarters' agreement. The Swedish delegation made it clear that this view was not dictated by any opposition in principle to the idea underlying the French delegation's proposal, but was due quite simply to the fact that these four countries were parties to international agreements on this matter. 797. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany, while agreeing in principle with the purport of the French delegation's proposal, stated that the presence of express provisions to that effect within the text of the Convention induced it to express a number of objections. As had been pointed out by the Netherlands delegation, the provisions governing the case in point were of a very technical nature and great care would have to be exercised to ensure that this did not give rise to arrangements which were incompatible with national legislation. At the very most, the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany could agree to a statement written into the Minutes to the effect that this problem would be dealt with in later provisions and in particular in the headquarters agreement. 798. The Netherlands delegation endorsed this viewpoint. 799. The French delegation submitted the following compromise proposal: "Professional representatives, their assistants and employees shall have the unrestricted right to exercise their profession for the purposes of implementing this Convention within the said States; these persons shall have the right to reside there with their families." 800. The Luxembourg delegation suggested that the matter of residence be dealt with subsequently and that only the first part of the French proposal be put to the vote. 801. The French delegation agreed to this suggestion. 802. The Committee voted against the French delegation's proposal by a majority of eight to six, with two abstentions. The Chairman noted that the Committee agreed that the discussion on this point should be set out in detail in the Minutes and that it should be recorded that the headquarters agreement between the Contracting States concerned and the President of the Office should settle the problems examined by the Committee. 803. The Committee referred the French delegation's proposal concerning paragraph 6 (see M/112, page 2) to the Drafting Committee for examination. 804. As regards paragraph 6, the Committee also instructed the Drafting Committee to examine the French delegation's proposal concerning Article 162, paragraphs 2, 3 and 6 that the word "agree" be deleted. 805. In the course of the examination of the outcome of the Drafting Committee's work (see M/141, pages 3 and 4), the United Kingdom delegation pointed out that the insertion of the phrase "in the same way as by a professional representative" at the beginning of paragraph 6 would pose certain problems in the United Kingdom, where the profession of solicitor and barrister was not subject to any written rules but was exercised in accordance with practices dating from time immemorial. The United Kingdom delegation therefore asked the Committee whether it could agree that this paragraph was to be interpreted as referring to these two categories of representatives. 806. The Committee agreed to this interpretation and decided that it should be noted in the Minutes. 807. The Committee agreed to instruct the Drafting Committee to elaborate an appropriate wording for paragraph 7 , whereby persons entered on the list during the transitional period who retained this right even after expiry of that period would be included in the concept of professional representatives. 808. The Committee examined the proposal by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany that a new paragraph 8 be added to this Article (se M/11, point 6). 809. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany

Page 68

professional representatives should not be required to be nationals of one of the Contracting States to be entered on the list. It felt that such a requirement would be rather out of place within the context of an international patent convention. It would, however, be prepared to have the nationality requirement replaced by the requirement that representatives must be resident in one of the Contracting States. 765. None of the delegations supported this proposal. 766. The French delegation explained the reasons which induced it to propose that paragraph 3 (see M/112) be amended to stipulate that persons whose names appeared on the list of professional representatives would be entitled to act before all departments of "and in all proceedings" before the European Patent Office. The purpose of this addition was to take account of the possibility under the Protocol on Centralisation (Section IV) of transferring examination tasks to certain national offices. 767. The Chairman noted that the French delegation's proposal was supported by several delegations. 768. The Netherlands delegation was totally in agreement with the principle underlying the French delegation's proposal and wondered whether it should not in fact be embodied in the Protocol itself. 769. The United Kingdom delegation suggested that this paragraph be amended by stipulating that professional representatives were entitled to act "in all proceedings established by this Convention". 770. The Committee agreed to the French delegation's proposal and instructed the Drafting Committee to examine whether this provision should be incorporated in the Convention or in the Protocol on Centralisation. 771. In the course of the examination of the results of the Drafting Committee's work (see M/141, pages 3 and 4), the Irish delegation pointed out that it interpreted this provision as meaning that "proceedings established by this Convention" did not apply to the proceedings referred to in Article 73, paragraph 1(b), concerning the filing of applications with national authorities. The Irish delegation asked the Committee if it concurred with this interpretation. 772. The Committee indicated its agreement to this interpretation and decided that this fact should be noted in the Minutes. 773. The Committee examined the French delegation's proposal concerning paragraph 4 as set out in M/112, page 2. 774. The French delegation pointed out that its proposal consisted of two separate parts. The first part related to a provision similar to that just adopted by the Committee with regard to paragraph 3, inasmuch as its aim was to extend the scope of the measure under consideration. The intention was to extend the obligation upon Contracting States within whose territory the European Patent Office would be located (Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands) to those Contracting States whose national offices would engage in work on behalf of the European Patent Office. The objective of the second part of the proposal was to enable professional representatives not only to have a place of business within the territory of the States concerned, but also to reside there and in addition to enable members of their families and their associates to have a place of residence and to exercise their profession within the territory of the States concerned. 775. The Chairman suggested that the Committee examine the two parts of the French delegation's proposal separately. He also called upon the French delegation to specify whether the first part of its proposal was intended to cover only those circumstances referred to under Section IV of the Protocol on Centralisation or also the possibility created by Main Committee II's decision on the interpretation of Article 31, paragraph 3, whereby tasks could be entrusted to national offices by the Administrative Council even after the expiry of the transitional period. 776. The French delegation stated that its proposal covered both cases. 777. The Committee agreed to the first part of the French delegation's proposal. 778. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany called upon the Committee to express an opinion on the following problem: was the obligation upon Contracting States to permit professional representatives to have a place of business within their territory to apply to all the territory in question or was it to be confined to the town (and its suburbs) in which the European Patent Office was to be located? 779. The United Kingdom delegation felt that there was no case for a restriction of the nature proposed by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany. The Finnish delegation concurred with this viewpoint. 780. The UNION, FICPI, CEIF and CNIPA delegations were also opposed to this restriction. 781. The Chairman called upon the Committee to examine the second part of the French delegation's proposal, which appeared to give rise to certain difficulties in view of restrictions on foreigners in the Contracting States as regards freedom of residence and freedom to engage in employment. ( He therefore wondered whether the French delegation's proposal should not be restricted by adding a clause which would ensure that national provisions in these fields were complied with. 782. The Swiss delegation contended that a provision of this nature would be out of place in this Convention on the grounds that it impinged upon the matter of the right of establishment, which had been dealt with in a number of bilateral and multilateral agreements. The Swiss delegation was therefore unable to support this proposal. 783. The Netherlands delegation shared the viewpoint expressed by the Swiss delegation and went on to state that the Governments would certainly interpret paragraph 4 in a reasonable manner, with the result that the problems underlying the French delegation's proposal would not arise in practice. 784. The Luxembourg delegation considered that the French delegation's proposal could perhaps be adopted if the following rider were added: "subject to national provisions on the right of establishment". 785. The United Kingdom delegation expressed objections, with regard to the French delegation's proposal for the same reasons as those voiced by the Swiss delegation. 786. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany was also opposed to this proposal on the grounds that its content went beyond normal practice in such cases. It drew the attention of the Committee to the fact that the right to exercise their profession was not granted to members of the families of European Patent Office employees. It would be the responsibility of the President of the European Patent Office to ensure in the agreement to be concluded with the host country that the usual facilities were granted not only to professional representatives but also to members of their families and their associates. 787. The Belgian delegation endorsed the opinion expressed by the Luxembourg delegation. 788. The UNION delegation was in favour of the French delegation's proposal, which it interpreted as referring solely to the right of residence and not to the right of members of the families of professional representatives to exercise their profession. 789. The CEIF delegation felt that it was essential that professional representatives enjoy reasonable opportunities

Page 69

by the United Kingdom delegation (points 732 and 733), and further proposed that in the case of documentation centres, no distinction should be made as to whether they had been set up on the basis of agreements with international organisations in the patent field or not. 737. The Swedish delegation supported this proposal which it felt enabled INPADOC to work efficiently. 738. The Main Committee agreed to this proposal. 739. At a later session, the Main Committee agreed that, in the wording of paragraph 2 (c) proposed by the Drafting Committee*, "organisation" meant both institutions such as INPADOC as well as private undertakings.

Article 131 - Legal and administrative co-operation

740. The Main Committee referred to the Drafting Committee a drafting proposal submitted orally by the French delegation for the heading of this Article. 741. The Main Committee referred to the Drafting Committee a drafting proposal from the Luxembourg delegation for paragraph 1 (M/9, point 26) and a drafting proposal from the United Kingdom delegation (M/40, point 21). 742. The Austrian delegation, supported by the Swiss delegation, proposed that provision be made in a new 𝐅 aragraph that, where notifications were made in national proceedings in respect of a claim to the right to the grant of a European patent or in respect of the revocation of a European patent, the courts or other authorities should assist each other on request even where the requesting authority was not a court (M/41, point 12). Experience had shown that, without such a requirement, national authorities which were not courts and which could not therefore claim that they were covered by the normal provisions governing legal co-operation, would have difficulties as regards notification. 743. The German delegation opposed this proposal since, as regards notification, it would interfere in national proceedings in the Contracting States. This would be an infringement of the principle which had so far been observed whereby national proceedings were only to be standardised to the extent that it was absolutely necessary for the purposes of the Convention. 744. The Netherlands delegation shared this opinion and added that the proposal went beyond the aim of Article 131 inasmuch as it sought to regulate legal co-operation not only between the European Patent Office and courts and authorities in the Contracting States but also that between the courts and thorities of the Contracting States. 745. The United Kingdom delegation felt that the proposed addition to Article 131 was unnecessary. 746. In the subsequent voting, 2 delegations were in favour and 9 against the Austrian proposal; 3 delegations abstained. 747. The Austrian delegation proposed that provision be made in a new paragraph that, in proceedings in respect of a claim to the right to the grant of a European patent or in respect of the revocation of a European patent, courts and other authorities in the Contracting States could request the European Patent Office to notify the claim or request (M/41, point 13). 748. This proposal was supported by no other delegation.

Article 132 - Exchange of publications

749. The Austrian delegation advocated the extension of the scope of paragraph 2 so that the European Patent Office could conclude agreements on the exchange of publications with, or the supply to, not just international organisations, but also documentation centres set up on the basis of agreements (M/78/I). The present wording, it might be claimed, gave an

• This is identical with the final wording of Article 130, paragraph 2(c)

exhaustive list of the bodies with which the European Patent Office could conclude such agreements.

750. The Swedish delegation was sympathetic to the Austrian proposal but wondered whether paragraph 2 should not be completely deleted since it was self-evident that the European Patent Office could conclude such agreements. 751. This was also the view of the United Kingdom delegation which, supported by the Irish delegation, accordingly proposed that paragraph 2 be deleted. If, on the other hand, the scope of this requirement were extended as desired by the Austrian delegation, the opposite inference could be drawn, namely that the European Patent Office could not conclude other agreements; this would not be desirable. 752. The Chairman pointed out that paragraph 2 could be so generally worded that the European Patent Office could conclude any kind of agreement on the exchange or supply of publications. 753. The WIPO delegation considered a more general wording as suggested by the Chair to be the best solution. 754. The Chairman's suggestion was adopted as a proposal by the German, French and Netherlands delegations. 755. The United Kingdom and Swedish delegations, and the Austrian delegation withdrew their proposals in favour of the German/French/Netherlands proposal. 756. The Main Committee adopted the more general wording of paragraph 2 suggested by the Chairman.

Article 133 - Representation

757. The Committee directed the Drafting Committee to examine whether the heading of this Article should be amended to read "General principles of representation", as proposed by the French delegation. 758. The Committee examined the amendment proposed by the Member States of the European Communities concerning paragraph 2 (see M/14, point 8) whereby the word "établissement" would be replaced by the word "siège" in the French text, with the term "seat" being substituted for "registered place of business" in the English text. 759. The United Kingdom delegation stated that it would prefer the term "registered place of business" to be replaced by "principal place of business" in the English version (see M/64, page 2). 760. The Committee directed the Drafting Committee to examine the matter. 761. The Committee agreed to refer the proposal by the Member States of the European Communities concerning paragraph 3 (see M/4, point 8) to the Drafting Committee for examination. 762. The Chairman noted that the Committee concurred with the French delegation's viewpoint that paragraph 3 should also apply during the transitional period. 763. In reply to a comment by the COPRICE delegation, the Committee signified its agreement to the following interpretation of paragraph 3: the use of the term "employee" did not preclude a company from being represented by one of its bodies, for example an administrator. The Committee held that this problem was covered by paragraph 1, whereby a natural person could represent himself and a legal person could be represented by one of its bodies. Paragraph 3 added that a legal person could also be represented by or act through its employees. The Committee further agreed that the word "employee" as used in paragraph 3 was to be taken in its widest meaning.

Article 134 - Professional representatives

764. The Swedish delegation elucidated its proposed amendment to paragraph 2 (M/53, page 4), to the effect that

Page 70

Introduction ..... 7 Report on the meeting of the Plenary ..... 9 Opening Meeting (M/PR/K/1) Minutes of the proceedings of the Credentials Committee ..... 25 (M/PR/V) Minutes of the proceedings of Main Committee I ..... 27 (M/PR/I) Minutes of the proceedings of Main Committee II ..... 109 (M/PR/II) Minutes of the proceedings of Main Committee III ..... 155 (M/PR/III) Minutes of the proceedings of the Committee of the Whole ..... 163 (M/PR/G) Report on the meeting of the Plenary ..... 199 Final Meeting (M/PR/K/2) List of participants ..... 211

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING

UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM

FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS (Munich, 10 September to 5 October, 1973)

Page 72

(3) Die Personen, die in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter eingetragen sind, sind berechtigt, vor allen Organen des Europäischen Patentamts aufzutreten. (4) Jede Person, die in die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter eingetragen ist, ist berechtigt, in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in den Niederlanden einen Geschäftssitz zur Ausübung der Vertretung in Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt zu begründen. (5) Der Präsident des Europäischen Patentamts kann in besonders gelagerten Fällen von der Voraussetzung nach Absatz 2 Buchstabe a Befreiung erteilen. (6) Die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann auch von jedem Rechtsanwalt, der in einem Vertragsstaat zugelassen ist und seinen Geschäftssitz in diesem Staat hat, in dem Umfang wahrgenommen werden, in dem er in diesem Staat die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentwesens ausüben kann. Absatz 4 ist entsprechend anzuwenden. (7) Der Verwaltungsrat kann Vorschriften über die Vorbildung und die Ausbildung erlassen, die eine Person besitzen muß, um zu der europäischen Eignungsprüfung zugelassen zu werden, über die Durchführung der europäischen Eignungsprüfung, die Errichtung oder Anerkennung eines Instituts, in denen die zugelassenen Vertreter zusammengeschlossen sind, sowie über die Disziplinargewalt, die dieses Institut oder das Europäische Patentamt über diese Personen besitzt.

[3 ^0] Persons whose names appear on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to act before all departments of the European Patent Office. (4) Any person whose name appears on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to establish a place of business in the Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands for the purpose of acting as a professional representative in proceedings before the European Patent Office. (5) The President of the European Patent Office may, in special circumstances, grant exemption from the requirement of paragraph 2(a). (6) Professional representation before the European Patent Office may also be undertaken by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States and having his place of business within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a professional representative in patent matters. Paragraph 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis. (7) The Administrative Council may adopt provisions governing the qualifications and training required of a person for admission to the European qualifying examination, the conduct of the European qualifying examination, the establishment or recognition of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives, and any disciplinary power to be exercised by that institute or the European Patent Office on such persons.

[^1] [^0]: Vgl. Regeln 103 (Löschung des zugelassenen Vertreters) und 107 (Rücknahme der Bescheinigung für die Eintragung des Vertreters in die Liste)

[^1]: Cf. Rules 103 (Deletion of the professional representative from the list) and 107 (Withdrawal of the certificate enabling a representative to be entered on the list)

Page 73

Kapitel III Vertretung Artikel 133 Vertretung (1) Vorbehaltlich Absatz 2 ist niemand verpflichtet, sich vor dem Europäischen Patentamt durch einen zugelassenen Vertreter vertreten zu lassen. (2) Die natürlichen und juristischen Personen, die. weder Wohnsitz noch Sitz in einem Vertragsstaat haben, müssen in jedem Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt durch einen zugelassenen Vertreter vertreten sein und Handlungen mit Wirkung gegenüber dem Europäischen Patentamt mit Ausnahme der Einreichung einer europäischen Patentanmeldung durch ihn vornehmen; in der Ausführungsordnung können weitere Ausnahmen zugelassen werden. (3) Die natürlichen und juristischen Personen mit Wohnsitz oder Sitz in einem Vertragsstaat können in jedem Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt durch einen ihrer Angestellten handeln, der kein zugelassener Vertreter zu sein braucht, aber einer Vollmacht nach MaBgabe der Ausführungsordnung bedarf. Der Verwaltungsrat kann in der Ausführungsordnung vorschreiben, ob und unter welchen Voraussetzungen Angestellte einer juristischen Person für andere juristische Personen mit Sitz im Gebiet eines Vertragsstaats, die mit ihr wirtschaftlich verbunden sind, handeln können. (4) In der Ausführungsordnung können Vorschriften über die gemeinsame Vertretung mehrerer Beteiligter, die gemeinsam handeln, vorgesehen werden.

[^0]

Representation

Article 133 Representation (1) Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, no person shall be compelled to be represented before the European Patent Office by a professional representative. (2) Natural and legal persons not having either a residence or registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States must be represented in all proceedings before the European Patent Office by a professional representative and act through him vis-a-vis that Office, other than in filing the European patent application; the Implementing Regulations may permit other exceptions. (3) Natural and legal persons having their residence or registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States may be represented in any proceedings before the European Patent Office by an employee, who need not be a professional representative but who must be authorised in accordance with the Implementing Regulations. The Administrative Council may determine in the Implementing Regulations whether and under what conditions an employee of such a legal person may also represent other legal persons which have their registered places of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States and which have economic links with the first legal person. (4) The Implementing Regulations may prescribe special provisions concerning the common representation of parties acting in common.

[^1]

Zugelassene Vertreter

(1) Die Vertretung natürlicher und juristischer Personen in Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann nur durch zugelassene Vertreter wahrgenommen werden, die in eine beim Europäischen Patentamt geführte Liste eingetragen sind. (2) In die Liste der zugelassenen Vertreter kann jede natürliche Person eingetragen werden, die die folgenden Voraussetzungen erfült: a) Die Person muß die Staatsangehörigkeit eines Vertragsstaats besitzen; b) die Person muß ihren Geschäftssitz oder Arbeitsplatz in einem Vertragsstaat haben; c) die Person muß die europäische Eignungsprüfung bestanden haben.

Die Eintragung erfolgt aufgrund eines Antrags, dem die Bescheinigungen beizufügen sind, aus denen sich die Erfüllung dieser Voraussetzungen ergibt.

Article 134

Professional representatives (1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings before the European Patent Office may only be undertaken by professional representatives whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the Office. (2) Any natural person who fulfils the following conditions may be entered on the list of professional representatives: (a) he must be a national of one of the Contracting States; (b) he must have his place of business or employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States; (c) he must have passed the European qualifying examination.

Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the above conditions are fulfilled.

[^0]: Vgl. Regeln 101 (Bestellung eines gemeinsamen Vertreters) und 102 (Vollmacht)

[^1]: Cf. Rules 101 (Appointment of a common representative) and 102 (Authorizations)

PROJET DE CONVENTION

INSTITUANT UN SYSTÈME EUROPÉEN DE DÉLIVRANCE DE BREVETS

MÜNCHNER DIPLOMATISCHE KONFERENZ

ÜBER DIE EINFÜHRUNG EINES EUROPÄISCHEN PATENTERTEILUNGSVERFAHRENS 1973 (München, 10. September bis 6. Oktober 1973)

MUNICH DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE

FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS, 1973 (Munich, 10 September to 6 October 1973)

CONFERENCE DIPLOMATIQUE DE MUNICH

POUR L'INSTITUTION D'UN SYSTÈME EUROPÉEN DE DÉLIVRANCE DE BREVETS (1973) (Munich, 10 septembre - 6 octobre 1973)

VORBEREITENDE DOKUMENTE

ausgearbeitet von. der Regierungskonferenz über die Einführung eines europäischen Patenterteilungsverfahrens herausgegeben von der Regierung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

PREPARATORY DOCUMENTS

drawn up by the Inter-Governmental Conference for the setting up of a European System for the Grant of Patents and published by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany

DOCUMENTS PRÉPARATOIRES

élaborés par la Conférence intergouvernementale pour l'institution d'un système européen de délivrance de brevets et publiés par le Gouvernement de la République fédérale d'Allemagne

Page 76

Article 133 51. Certain amendments were made to the wording of the German and French texts of this Article. The terms "berufsmässiger Vertreter" and "mandataire professionel" were replaced by the terms "zugelassener Vertreter" and "mandataire agréé".

These new terms refer only to the qualifications required for the exercise of the functions in question, without suggesting that these functions must be exercised on a continuous and permanent basis.

Article 142a

52. In reply to one delegation's observation that difficulties could arise in the context of the Second Convention owing to the fact that Article 159 provides for exemption from the requirement of nationality of one of the Contracting States, it was observed that Article 142a merely presented an option for the group of States referred to in Article 141 and that they were free to adopt a more liberal position.

Article 148, paragraph 3

53. The Conference amended paragraph 3 of this provision in order to take greater account of the provisions of Article 11, paragraph 3 of the Co-operation Treaty which stipulates that an international application has, from the date on which it is filed, the effects of an ordinary national application.

Page 77

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- Secretariat -

Brussels, 26 September 1972 BR/219/72

MINUTES of the

6th meeting of the Inter-Governmental Conference for the setting up of a European System for the Grant of Patents (Luxembourg, 19 to 30 June 1972)

Page 78

Article 133 (continued) (5) The President of the European Patent Office may, in special circumstances, grant exemption from the requirement of paragraph 2(a). (6) Professional representation before the European Patent Office may also be undertaken by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States and having his place of business within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a professional representative in patent matters. Paragraph 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis. (7) The Administrative Council may adopt provisions governing the qualifications and training required of a person for admission to the European qualifying examination, the conduct of the European qualifying examination, the establishment or recognition of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives, and any disciplinary power to be exercised by that institute or the European Patent Office on such persons.

Page 79

Article 133 (153, paras. 1 and 5) Professional representatives (1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings before the European Patent Office may only be undertaken by professional representatives whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the Office. (2) Any natural person who fulfils the following conditions may be entered on the list of professional representatives: (a) he must be a national of one of the Contracting States; (b) he must have his place of business or employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States; (c) he must have passed the European qualifying examination.

Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by certificates which must indicate that the above conditions are fulfilled. (3) Persons whose names appear on the list of professional representatives shall be entitled to act before all departments of the European Patent Office. (4) Any person whose name appears on the list of professional representatives and who has his place of business in a Contracting State other than that in which the European Patent Office is located shall be entitled also to establish a place of business in the latter State for the purpose of acting as a professional representative in proceedings before the European Patent Office.

Page 80

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 25 May 1972 BR/199/72

- Secretariat -

Deutsches Potentamt Eing. 3 1. MAI 372

DRAFT CONVENTION ESTABLISHING A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

(Stage reached on 20 May 1972)

BR/199 e/72

Page 81

hypothesis of the representation of two or more persons by one representative; this was done so thot in the event of a person without a residence or registered place of business in a Contracting State being a co-applicant, his professional representative need not necessarily be the common representative, since an exception could be made where a co-applicant with a residence or registered place of business in one of the Contracting States were named first in the application and had commissioned his own professional representative.

This provision was also extended in the third sentence to apply to joint proprietors.

59. Paragraph 2 of the former Rule 104, which could only apply in the transitional period, was placed with the other transitional provisions as the new Rule 108.

Page 82

55. The Committee agreed that not only representatives whose names appeared on the list maintained by the European Patent Office (Article 133, paragraph 4) but also legal practitioners (paragraph 6) should have the opportunity to set up a place of business in the State in which the European Patent Office was located. This possibility should however only be opened up for the purpose of representation in proceedings before the European Patent Office, and should not be used for other ends. 56. It was made clear in Article 133, paragraph 7, that the Administrative Council could adopt provisions governing not only the qualifications and training required of persons entitled to act as representatives and who had to pass the European qualifying examination, the conduct of the examination and the establishment or recognition of an institute constituted by the persons entitled to act as professional representatives, but also those governing any disciplinary power over such persons. Contrary to the wishes of one delegation, the question of whether disciplinary power should be exercised by the institute or by the Administrative Council was expressly left open.

The Administrative Council would have to adopt these provisions by a three-quarters majority (Article 33, paragraph 2). 57. A special provision was created in Article 142a to cover representation before any special departments of the European Patent Office which might be set up under separate conventions in accordance with Articles 141 and 142 . 58. Rule 102, paragraph 1, second sentence of the Implementing Regulations was amended to take account of the

Page 83

national law someone is both an officer of a legal person and an employee of that legal person, he would not require an authorisation but would only have to provide proof of his capacity as an officer.

Other matters

52. In connection with the problems relating to representation the Committee took general note of the fact that the laws of the individual States on representation (e.g. regarding the representation of minors) should also be applicable, but that this need not be laid down in the Convention. 53. Regarding the condition that only nationals of Contracting States were entitled to act as representatives (Article 133, paragraph 2(a)), one delegation pointed out that this could lead to cases of hardship. The reply was given that under Article 133, paragraph 5, the President of the European Patent Office could grant exemptions in special cases. The Committee noted that in general the Administrative Council would be able to give the President of the European Patent Office guidance on exemptions from the nationality requirement. 54. The condition that persons entitled to act as representatives had to have their place of business in one of the Contracting States was regarded as too restricting in certain cases; for this reason the words "or employment" were added in Article 133, paragraph 2(b), in order to include employees.

Page 84

51. In connection with the provisions governing acting through employees the question of collective representation, i.e. whether and to what extent employees of one legal person could act for another legal person having economic links with the first, was discussed.

The French delegation proposed that the principle of acting for legal persons with economic links should be accepted and that the details should be settled at a later stage. The majority of the Committee came out against both this proposal, and a proposal from the Netherlands delegation that the question of group representation should not be dealt with at all in the Convention. The Committee finally adopted by a majority the Chairman's proposal that it could be laid down in the Implementing Regulations whether and under what conditions employees of one legal person could act for another legal person having economic links with the first, and that this would only be permitted where the second legal person had its registered place of business in one of the Contracting States. It was agreed that these measures would be adopted subsequently by the Administrative Council but would not for the time being be included in the Implementing Regulations (see Article 132, paragraph 3, second sentence).

It was specified that the term "employee" was to be construed in a wide sense and could also include directors and officers. It was also agreed that if according to his

Page 85

patent matters before the central industrial property office of the Contracting State in which they were based would suffice (Article 159a, paragraph 1). Anyone whose name was entered on the list of professional representatives during the transitional period would not lose his entitlement on the grounds that he was not a national of a Contracting State at the beginning of the final phase or that he had not passed the European qualifying test (Article 159a, paragraph 7).

A further measure was laid down for the transitional period to the effect that persons having their place of business or employment in a State which did not require special professional qualifications for representatives must have habitually acted as professional representatives before their central industrial property offices for at least five years (Article 159a, paragraph 3). The Committee discussed whether the President of the European Patent Office could, if necessary, grant exemption from this requirement, and agreed by a majority that he should be able to do so (Article 159a, paragraph 5). 50. Regarding the matter of natural and legal persons acting through their employees, the Committee decided not to adopt the Chairman's proposal that the restrictions hitherto imposed under the laws of the individual States should be retained during the transitional period. It was decided instead that as soon as the Convention came into force natural and legal persons should be able to act through their employees without any of the restrictions previously imposed (Article 132, paragraph 3, first sentence).

Page 86

It was replied that in practice firms in particular would tend to be represented by qualified rather than unqualified employees. It was also permissible for the natural persons of a Contracting State to act on their own behalf before the European Patent Office. The solution expressed in the principles set out above was an attempt to reach a compromise between the two opposing points of view held by patent agents on one hand and industry on the other. 47. The Committee agreed to provide both a transitional ruling and a final ruling on professional representation. 48. In the final phase only legal practitioners and persons fulfilling the three following conditions would be entitled to act as representatives: they would have to be nationals of one of the Contracting States, have their place of business or employment within the territory of one of the Contracting States, and have passed the European qualifying examination (Article 133, paragraphs 1, 2 and 6). 49. A less stringent ruling was provided for a transitional period, the expiry of which was to be determined by the Administrative Council, than for the final phase: in the first place it would not be necessary to be a national of a Contracting State in order to qualify to act as a representative. Secondly it would not be necessary to have passed the European qualifying examination; authorisation to represent natural or legal persons in

Page 87

(b) Representation (Articles 132, 133 and 159a) (BR/GT I/164/72) 46. The Committee discussed the question of representation before the European Patent Office on the basis of the proposals put forward by the Chairman in BR/GT I/164/72. It agreed on the following principles: (i) Natural or legal persons having their residence or registered place of business in a Contracting State, may act on their own behalf before the European Patent Office; (ii) Natural or legal persons not having either a residence or registered place of business in a Contracting State must in principle be represented before the European Patent Office by a professional representative.

A third principle whereby legal or natural persons having their residence or registered place of business in a Contracting State may also act through an employee was also adopted by the Committee.

These principles were set out in Article 132, paragraphs 1 to 3 .

The Netherlands delegation objected to the principle last stated on the grounds that it was inconsistent on the one hand to open up the possibility of acting through employees who would not be required to take a qualifying examination, and on the other hand to require that professional representatives should fulfil special conditions.

Page 88

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 6 June 1972 BR/209/72

- Secretariat -

MINUTES of the second meeting of the Co-ordinating Committee held in Brussels from 15 to 19 May 1972

1. The second meeting of the Co-ordinating Committee was held in Brussels from 15 to 19 May 1972 with Dr HAERTEL, President of the German Patent Office, in the Chair.

Representatives of the Commission of the European Communities, of the IIB and of WIPO took part as observers. The representatives of the Council of Europe sent their apologies for being unable to attend. The list of those taking part in the meeting is given in Annex I to this report. 2. The Co-ordinating Committee - hereinafter referred to as the Committee - adopted the provisional agenda as contained in BR/174/72, supplemented as follows:

Representation

Article 132 (153) Professional representation

- Reserved -

Page 90

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 24 April 1972 BR / 184 / 72

- Secretariat -

DRAFT CONVENTION
ESTABLISHING A EUROPEAN SYSTEM
FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

(Text drawn up by the Conference Drafting Committee 8 to 24 March and 10 to 20 April 1972)

Page 91

In order to avoid possible abuses, the sentence in paragraph 2 could be redrafted in such a way that only persons, whether natural or legal, entitled under their national law to undertake the same representation before their national office, would be included in the list drawn up by the European Patent Office.

Another delegation indicated that it could support this proposal.

The Conference considered that paragraphs 1 and 2 ought to remain as they were, since these provisions had been introduced in order to ensure that representation before the Patent Office was undertaken by highly qualified persons; there would no longer be any guarantee of high qualifications if access was also granted to legal persons, who could then send along representatives who might not necessarily fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 2. It was also observed that this paragraph did not rule out the possibility of legal persons registering their members, or members of their managing bodies, as such, on the European Patent Office list.

The Yugoslav delegation reserved the right to submit proposals and grounds for these proposals at a later date to Working Party I.

82. The Conference gave a mandate to Working Party I to draw up the provision referred to in Note (1).

BR/125 e/71 ght/KM/bp

Page 92

The Conference decided to retain provisionally in paragraph 2 the solution providing for the unrestricted inspection by those concerned of all documents relating to the proceedings for grant and to opposition proceedings, and to reserve its final decision until it had ascertained the opinions of the interested circles on the subject.

Article 149 (Information concerning national applications) 80. The Austrian delegation brought up the question of the obligation on the applicant to indicate, upon request and within a certain period, the countries in which he had filed applications for national patents for the whole or part of his invention. This delegation expressed the opinion that the sanction, consisting in the refusal of the application in the event of failure to submit an answer, was too severe and expressed a reservation on the subject.

CHAPTER IV

Representation Article 152 (Professional representation) 81. The Yugoslav delegation proposed to extent to legal persons the right to undertake professional representation before the European Patent Office, which is restricted in paragraph 1 to natural persons. In certain countries, including Yugoslavia, efforts are being made to improve the qualifications of persons professionally undertaking representation in patent proceedings, by setting up groups or associations with the status of a legal person.

Page 93

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 7 July 1971 B R / 125 / 71

- Secretariat -

M I N U T E S

of the 4th Meeting of the Inter-Governmental Conference for the setting up of a European System for the Grant of Patents (Luxembourg, 20 to 28 April 1971)

Page 94

CHAPTER IV Representation Article 152 Professional representation (1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings before the European Patent Office may, subject to the provisions of paragraph 5 below, only be undertaken by natural persons whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the said Office. (2) Any person having his registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States who, according to a certificate furnished by the central industrial property office of that State, is entitled to act professionally as a representative in patent matters before that office, may be entered on the list. Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by the certificate referred to above, which must specify the extent of such entitlement. (3) When, in any Contracting State, entitlement to act as a representative is not conditional upon the requirement of special professional qualifications, persons applying to be entered on the list who act as representatives in patent matters before the central industrial property office of the said State must have habitually acted as such for at least five years. Provided that, persons whose professional qualification to represent natural and legal persons in patent matters before the central industrial property office of one of the Contracting States is officially recognised in accordance with the regulations laid down by such State shall not be subject to the condition of having exercised the profession. The certificate referred to in the preceding paragraph must indicate that the applicant satisfies one of the conditions referred to in the present paragraph. (4) Persons whose names are entered on the list referred to in paragraph 1 may only act before the European Patent Office to the extent that they are entitled, within the terms of the certificate referred to in paragraph 2 , to act as representatives in patent matters in the Contracting States in which they exercise their profession. (5) Representation before the European Patent Office may also be undertaken by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States, and having his registered place of business within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a representative in patent matters.

Hotes to Article 152 :

1. The State in which the European Patent Office is located will have to take the necessary steps, in good time, to enable representatives who are nationals of other Contracting States to establish a registered place of business in its own territory.

A provision to this effect, which should anpear in the Convention, will be drafted later. 2. The provisions of this Article will be re-examined in the light of discussions with the interested circles. B̅R̅ / CCe / 71 gc

Page 95

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- Secretariat -

Brussels, 15th February 1971 BR / 88 / 71

ESTABLISHING

A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- Stage reached on 29 January 1971 -

Page 96

In the first place it felt that enforcement procedures in the various States expected to be party to the Convention were too diverse to allow the Convention to impose a uniform solution, and secondly that it was inappropriate for decisions of the European Patent Office to be regarded as decisions by foreign courts.

It was however decided to amend the text of this Article to the effect that the decisions of the European Patent Office referred to in this Article would be treated in each State as verdicts given by a national civil court of that State, subject to no control other than as to authenticity.

The United Kingdom and Netherlands delegations reserved their final position.

Article 153 - Professional representation 67. With regard to the French proposal that paragraph 5 of this Article should be extended to cover "l'avoue", the Working Party considered the advantages and disadvantages of being more or less specific in this respect. It decided that it would probably be impossible to convey all the national variations in a single phrase in the text of the Convention, and that the present text already referred moreover to national criteria as to the qualifications of representatives in patent matters, so that a fairly wide definition had to be used.

Page 97

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

- Secretariat -

Brussels, 28th October 1971 BR / 132 / 71

MINUTES

of the meeting of Working Party I, held in Luxembourg from 14 to 17 September 1971

Opening of the meeting and adoption of the agenda

1. The Working Party held its 8th meeting in Luxembourg from Tuesday 14 to Friday 17 September 1971, with Dr HAERTEL, President of the German Patent Office, in the Chair.

This meeting, which was devoted primarily to the examination of certain legal problems connected with the provisions being drawn up, was also attended by legal experts from the countries of the delegations to Working Party I.

Representatives from the Commission of the European Communities, WIPO and the IIB were also present at the meeting (1). The representative of the General Secretariat of the Council of Europe sent his apologies for being unable to attend.

The Working Party adopted the provisional agenda (2). (1) See Annex I for list of those attending. (2) See Annex II for the provisional agenda (BR/GT I/109/71) and the list of the provisions of the Second Preliminary Draft Convention and the First Preliminary Draft Implementing Regulations to be examined at the meeting (BR/GT I/111/71). BR / 132 e/71 ley/KM/ad

Page 98

Article 153 (Professional representation) 28. ... The Working Party agreed to wait until the interested circles had, at the next hoaring arranged for them, submitted their proposals concerning the question of representation, before drafting the provision covered by Note 1 in the Second Preliminary Draft.

(Item 2 b on the Agenda)

29. Assisted by the legal experts, and acting on the basis of an Aide-Mémoire (BR/GT I/119/71), Working Party I resumed its examination of a certain number of articlesraising problems of a more exclusively legal character concerning which it had not been able to complete its deliberations at its 8th meeting (cf. BR/132/71, point 3).

The present Minutes provide an account of the ground covered during the 8th and 10th meetings.

Article 15 (Right to the grant of European patent) Article 16 (Patent applications by persons not entitled to apply)

Page 99

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR TEE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 16 December 1971 B R / 144 / 71

- Secretariat -

MINUTES

of the 10th meeting of Working Party I, held in Luxembourg from 22 to 26 November 1971

1. Working Party I held its 10th meeting in Luxembourg from 22 to 26 November 1971, with Dr. HAERTEL, President of the Deutsches Patentamt, in the Chair.

Representatives from the Commission of the European Communities, the IIB and WIPO attended the meeting as observers. The Council of Europe representatives eent their apologies for being unable to attend. For the list of those present at the 10th meeting see Annex I to these minutes. 2. Working Party I adopted the provisional agenda as contained in BR/GT I/133/71 on the understanding that item 3 would also cover the examination of a number of problems including those referred to in BR/GT I/138/71. The provisional agenda is given in Annex II to these minutes. 3. The Working Party I Drafting Committee met first under the chairmanship of Mr. van BENTHEM, President of the Octrooiraad, and, following his departure, under that of Mr. LABRY, Embassy Counsellor at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (France).

Page 100

Article 148 (Notification and provisions of the Implementing Regulations relating thereto) 90. The Netherlands delegation proposed that Article 148 should be transferred to the Implementing Regulations in order, if necessary, to enable amendments to be made to the system currently provided for "ithout having to use the procedure for revising the Convention. It was pointed out in this connection that several national patent offices are operating satisfactorily at present without a system of official postal notification of the documents. The possibility of providing for the same system for the European Patent Office in the future should not be excluded.

The Working Party did not adopt this proposal, and kept Article 148 in the Convention.

Article 153 (Professional representation) Article 154 (Compulsory representation) 91. The Working Party "ill be informed of the Chairman's proposals at the next meeting. 92. The Working Party "as not able to examine the comments made by the interested circles concerning the Implementing Regulations, due to shortage of time.

Page 101

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 13 April 1972 BR/177/72

- Secretariat -

R E P O R T

on the 11th meeting of Working Party I held in Luxembourg from 28 February to 3 March 1972

1. Working Party I held its 11th meeting in Luxembourg from 28 February to 3 March 1972 with Dr Haertel, President of the Deutsches Patentamt in the Chair.

Representatives of the Commission of the European Communities, the IIB and WIPO attended the meeting as observers. The Representatives of the Council of Europe sent apologies for absence. Those present at the 11th meeting are listed in Annex I to this report. 2. Working Party I adopted the provisional agenda as contained in BR/GT I/143/72; it was agreed that Articles 153 and 154 would be dealt with by the Co-ordinating Committee at its next meeting scheduled for 15 to 19 May 1972. The provisional agenda is contained in Annex II to this report. 3. The Drafting Committee of Working Party I was chaired by Mr van Benthem, President of the Octrooiraad.

The results of the Drafting Committee's work were circulated under reference BR/176/72.

Page 102

it would also refer to employees of an undertaking acting on its behalf before patent offices, since their status as wage-earners prevented them from taking on other commissions.

UNICE, for its part, pointed out that the present wording of Article 153 would exclude the possibility of enrolling certain consulting engineers from France on the list of the European Patent Office. In fact, these consulting engineers were employed by industry and acted for several companies, without representing them, as it was the parent company as such which represented its subsidiaries.

In conclusion, the organisations representing patent agents recognised that these problems still remained open and considered it advisable that contacts should be made between them and organisations representing industrial federations. It was then agreed that further suggestions on the matter would be submitted to the Conference after consulting the parties concerned.

Page 103

159. Other organisations (IAPIP, CEIF, UNICE, EIRMA, COPRICE, and ICC) said that they could accept the syster. laid down in the present text of Article 153, inasmuch as, by virtue of Article 154, the employees of a company are entitled to act on behalf of that company before the European Patent Office. Under these circumstances, these organisations stated that they were in favour of industrial employees having the option of being entered on the list held by the European Patent Office. This should, however, be nerely optional. In any case, it did not seem acceptable to these organisations that very competent persons should be excluded from the list simply because they were employees and not independent.

The COPRICE stressed in this connection, that it would be valuable for the European Patent Office to have as spokesman a head of a professional institution of patent representatives composed of both independent staff and of employees in industry. 160. The question thus arose as to whether Article 153 should be interpreted as referring both to agents for independent patents and to patent office employees in undertakings, or only to the former.

No precise answer was given to this question. According to an initial interpretation (UNEPA), this article would refer to natural persons only, who would act as representatives before the European Patent Office for a specific fee. According to another interpretation,

Page 104

and legal persons not having their residence or a registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States were allowed to file their application personally, there would be a very great risk of deficient filings and this would impose a heavy burden on the European Patent Office.

The ICC thus opposed this amendment. B. 158. Three organisations (GNIPA, FICPI and UNEPA) submitted a new draft of Article 153 to the Conference (cf. BR/161/72). These organisations were in favour of the principle of the compulsory registration of persons providing professional representation before the European Patent Cffico, on a list drawn up by it for this purpose, and proposed a solution which was intended to guarantee respect of acquired rights and which provides for the transition from a transitional stage to the permanent stage. During the transitional stage there would be a "national approach" in the sense that persons entitled by a certificate issued by the central national industrial property office to act regularly as representatives in patent matters could be enrolled on the list drawn up by the European Patent Office. If the law of the Contracting State did not provide for such a special professional qualification acquired by means of an official or officially recognised examination, a period of 5 years acting as a representative at national level would be required for enrolment on the above-mentioned list. During the permanent stage, enrolment on the list would be subject to a qualifying examination (European approach).

Page 105

one of the Contracting States, under the conditions and according to the method set out in paragraph 1."

This provision would in particular allow a European parent company which had made its patents over to a nonEuropean subsidiary, to act before the European Patent Office in order to protect the improvements made by that subsidiary. It did not seem logical that the basic invention should when extended, be entrusted to representatives outside the group.

FICPI, CNIPA and UNEPA made reservations concerning this proposal. Apart from objections already made to the possibility of one legal person acting on behalf of another legal person, they stressed the difficulties, in the case in question, of seeing exactly what link there should be between the various members of a group with economic links.

The ICC considered that this proposal could, in the end, result in an employee of a company with its registered place of business outside the Contracting States acting in proceedings before the European Patent Office. While not opposing the principle behind this proposal, the ICC pointed out that it could not accept it in its present form. 157. Only one organisation, the ICC, commented on the amendment which Working Party I suggested should be made to paragraph 3, namely to exclude the filing of a European patent application from the proceedings requiring compulsory representation. According to this organisation, if natural

Page 106

Three organisations, FICPI, CNIPA and UNEPA, opposed this request. They pointed out that if a legal person were to be allowed to act on behalf of another legal person, the system could be abused, as it would suffice to set up a certain type of company to avoid the provisions concerning professional representation. 156. All the organisations which expressed an opinion were broadly in favour of paragraph 2, which lays down that natural and legal persons not having a residence or a registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States, must be represented in all proceedings before the European Patent Office. FICPI, CNIPA and UNEPA did however request that the adjective "principal" be inserted before the words "residence" and "registered place of business". According to these organisations, a company having its principal residence or registered place of business outside the territory of the Contracting States and setting up a branch or subsidiary within the said territory, should not be able to benefit under paragraph 1 in proceedings before the European Patent Office.

The ICC opposed this request, as it saw no reason to be less liberal than the text adopted by the Conference.

On the other hand, CEIF supported by FEMIPI, UNICE and CPCCI, raised the problem of industrial groups with economic links, certain members of which had their headquarters outside the territory of the Contracting States. It proposed that the following sentence be added to paragraph 2 of the present Article 154: "however such persons may act through a legal person having a residence or a registered place of business within the territory of

Page 107

Patent Office was aware of all the provisions governing this question in the various States, and that an examination would be made in each case to establish whether the person acting for a particular company was entitled to act before his national office.

The ICC wondered whether a solution to this problem might be to provide for a special authorisation according to which a specific natural person would be entitled to act for a specific legal person.

This view was shared by COPRICE which, in a document submitted during the Conference (cf. BR/166/72, page 6), proposed the text of a new paragraph for insertion into the present article 154 before paragraph 1. 155. In addition, CEIF, supported by the CPCCI, FEMIPI and UNICE, requested that the following sentence be inserted in paragraph 1: "similarly, it may act on behalf of another legal person which has economic links with it or which has concluded with it a technical co-operation or research agreement."

This provision was intended to take account of the present day situation, typified by industrial groups within which there were subsidiaries specialising in research and others specialising in development. The interests of the group would be jeopardized if either the parent company or a company in the group were unable to act before the European Patent Office in respect of inventions made by a subsidiary or by another company in the group.

Page 108

This request was strongly criticised by FICPI, CNIPA and UNEPA.

These organisations were against the insertion of the sentence requested by CEIF but supported the text set out in Article 154, paragraph 1. They pointed out that, taking account of the different laws in the various Contracting States, the principle of maintaining acquired rights presumed that paragraph 1 would be interpreted in accordance with the law of each Contracting State. This "national approach" would mean that each interested party would be in a position to act before the European Patent Office, in the same way as it had the right to act before its own national office.

These same organisations, pointed out that there was no reason to introduce a European approach which would provide for a considerably more liberal solution than that laid down by the laws of certain States, such as the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, where only members of companies' departments were allowed to act for their companies before the European Patent Office; otherwise companies had to act via patent agents.

In conclusion, these organisations considered that the effect of accepting the CEIF proposal would make all the rules laid down in the present Article 153 superfluous.

The national approach was also criticised by other organisations. In particular the ICC and COPRICE pointed out that this approach would presuppose that the European

Page 109

153. It was noted that Article 154, paragraph 1, had to be interpreted as referring to both natural and legal persons.

No problem was raised with regard to natural persons, but requests and comments were made with regard to legal persons. 154. CEIF, supported by the CPCCI, EIRMA, FEMIPI and UNICE, pointed out that legal persons acted via natural persons and that the legal provisions concerning this power to act varied according to the Contracting States, and therefore requested that Article 153, paragraph 1, be clarified by the insertion of the following: "in particular, a legal person may act in proceedings before the European Patent Office through one of its agents appointed in accordance with its statutes, or through one of its directors or through one of its employees authorised accordingly".

In support of this request, which was termed the "European approach" since it departed from current national provisions, CEIF pointed out that specialisation in the various transactions which are a vital part of the life of companies now necessitated the setting up of patent departments within companies themselves: certain powers were delegated by company directors to those employed in these departments.

However, if the principle of freedom of natural persons to act before the European Patent Office was accepted, there was no reason why companies should be denied the possibility of acting before the European Patent Office indirectly through the natural person of their choice.

Page 110

Article 153 (Professional representation) and Article 154 (Compulsory representation) 150. Statements by the non-governmental international organisations on questions dealt with in these two Articles mainly concerned the following two points: A. Freedom to act personally or requirement to be represented in proceedings before the European Patent Office. B. Procedure for professional representation in proceedings before the European Patent Office. A. 151. The regulations concerning this point are laid down in paragraph 1 of Article 154, which contains the general principle that, subject to the provisions of the following paragraph, no person is to be compelled to be represented before the European Patent Office. 152. One organisation, CEIF, requested that for reasons of logic and the legislative consistency, the principle of freedom to act personally before the European Patent Office be inserted as a "general provision" at the beginning of Chapter IV of Part VIII, and the order of present Articles 153 and 154 be inverted. EIRMA supported this suggestion.

Page 111

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 15 March 1972 BR/169/72

- Secretariat -

M I N U T E S

of the

- 5th Meeting of the Inter-Governmental Conference for the Setting up of a European System for the Grant of Patents

Part II

Hearing of the non-governmental international organisations on the Second Preliminary Draft of a Convention establishing a European System for the Grant of Patents (Luxembourg, 26 January to 1 February 1972)

Page 112

le territoire duquel elle a lieu. La formule exécutoire est apposée, sans autre contrôle que celui de l'authenticité du titre, par l'autorité nationale que le gouvernement de chacun des États contractants désignera à cet effet et dont il donnera connaissance à l'Office européen des brevets. (3) Après l'accomplissement de ces formalités à la demande de l'intéressé, celui-ci peut poursuivre l'exécution forcée en saisissant directement l'organe compétent suivant la législation nationale.

Représentation professionnelle

(1) La représentation des personnes physiques et morales dans les procédures devant l'Office européen des brevets ne peut, sous réserve des dispositions du paragraphe 5 , être assurée que par les personnes physiques inscrites sur la liste établie à cet effet par ledit office. (2) Peut être inscrite sur la liste toute personne ayant son domicile professionnel sur le territoire de l'un des États contractants et habilitée, selon une attestation délivrée par le service central de la propriété industrielle de cet État, à exercer professionnellement la représentation en matière de brevets d'invention devant ledit service. L'inscription est faite sur requête accompagnée de l'attestation susvisée qui doit préciser l'étendue de l'habilitation. (3) Lorsque, dans un État contractant, l'habilitation à représenter n'est pas subordonnée à l'exigence d'une qualification professionnelle spéciale, les requérants qui exercent la représentation en matière de brevets devant le service central de la propriété industrielle dudit État doivent avoir exercé cette représentation, à titre habituel, pendant cinq ans au moins. Toutefois, sont dispensées de la condition d'exercice de la profession, les personnes dont la qualification professionnelle à assurer, en matière de brevets d'invention, la représentation des personnes physiques et morales devant le service central de la propriété industrielle d'un des États contractants, est constatée officiellement conformément à la réglementation établie par cet État. L'attestation visée au paragraphe précédent doit indiquer que le requérant satisfait à l'une des conditions prévues au présent paragraphe. (4) Les représentants inscrits sur la liste visée au paragraphe 1 ne peuvent assurer une représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets que dans la mesure où ils peuvent, aux termes de l'attestation prévue au paragraphe 2, assurer une représentation en matière de brevets d'invention dans l'État contractant où ils exercent leur activité. (5) La représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets peut également être assurée par tout avocat habilité à exercer dans l'un des États contractants

Bemerkungen zu Artikel 153:

1. Der Staat, in dem das Europäische Patentamt seinen Sitz hat, muß rechtzeitig die erforderlichen Maßnahmen treffen, damit Vertreter, die Staatsangehörige eines anderen Vertragsstaats sind, in dem Staat, in dem das Amt seinen Sitz hat, einen Geschäffssitz haben können.

Eine entsprechende Bestimmung des Übereinkommens soll noch ausgearbeitet werden. 2. Dieser Artikel wird erneut geprüft werden, wenn die Stellungnahmen der interessierten Kreise vorliegen.

Notes to Article 153:

1. The State in which the European Patent Office is located will have to take the necessary steps, in good time, to enable representatives who are nationals of other Contracting States to establish a registered place of business in its own territory. A provision to this effect, which should appear in the Convention, will be drafted later. 2. The provisions of this Article will be re-examined in the light of discussions with the interested circles.

Remarques concernant l'article 153 :

1. L'État du siège de l'Office devra prendre, en temps utile, les dispositions nécessaires pour permettre aux représentants ressortissant d'autres États contractants, d'avoir dans l'État du siège, un domicile professionnel. Une disposition à cet effet, qui devra figurer dans la Convention, sera élaborée ultérieurement. 2. Cet article sera réexaminé après que l'avis des milieux intéressés aura été recueilli.

Page 113

dessen Hoheitsgebiet sie stattfindet. Die Vollstreckungsklausel wird nach einer Prüfung, die sich lediglich auf die Echtheit des Titels erstrecken darf, von der nationalen Behörde erteilt, welche die Regierung jedes Vertragsstaats zu diesem Zweck bestimmt und dem Europäischen Patentamt benennt. (3) Sind diese Formvorschriften auf Antrag des die Vollstreckung betreibenden Beteiligten erfüllt, so kann dieser die Zwangsvollstreckung nach nationalem Recht betreiben, indem er die zuständige Stelle unmittelbar anruft.

KAPITEL IV

Vertretung Artikel 153 Berufsmäßiger Vertreter (1) Vorbehaltlich Absatz 5 kann die Vertretung natürlicher und juristischer Personen in Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt nur durch natürliche Personen wahrgenommen werden, die in eine beim Europäischen Patentamt geführte Liste eingetragen sind. (2) In die Liste kann jede Person eingetragen werden, die ihren Geschäftssitz im Gebiet eines der Vertragsstaaten hat und die gemäß einer Bescheinigung der nationalen Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz dieses Vertragsstaats befugt ist, die berufsmäßige Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor dieser Behörde auszuüben. Die Eintragung erfolgt auf Grund eines Antrags, dem die oben genannte Bescheinigung beizufügen ist, aus der sich der Umfang der Vertretungsbefugnis ergeben muß. (3) Unterliegt in einem Vertragsstaat die Vertretungsbefugnis nicht dem Erfordernis einer besonderen beruflichen Befähigung, so müssen die Antragsteller die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz dieses Staats mindestens fünf Jahre lang regelmäßig ausgeübt haben. Die Voraussetzung der Berufsausübung ist jedoch nicht für Personen erforderlich, deren berufliche Befähigung, natürliche oder juristische Personen auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz eines der Vertragsstaaten zu vertreten, nach den Vorschriften dieses Staats amtlich festgestellt worden ist. Aus der Bescheinigung nach Absatz 2 muß sich ergeben, daß der Antragsteller eine der vorstehenden Voraussetzungen erfüllt. (4) Die Vertreter, die in die Liste nach Absatz 1 eingetragen sind, dürfen vor dem Europäischen Patentamt die Vertretung nur in dem Umfang wahrnehmen, in dem sie gemäß der Bescheinigung nach Absatz 2 die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts in dem Vertragsstaat wahrnehmen können, in dem sie ihre Tätigkeit ausüben. (5) Die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann auch von jedem Rechtsanwalt, der in einem der Vertragsstaaten zugelassen ist und seinen Geschäftssitz in diesem Staat hat, in dem Umfang wahrgenommen werden, in dem er in diesem Staat die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts ausüben kann. order shall be issued, without further requirement other than that of the authenticity of the document, by the national authority which the government of each of the Contracting States shall designate for this purpose, and of which the European Patent Office shall be informed. (3) When these formalities have been completed at his request, the party concerned may proceed to enforcement by bringing the matter directly before the authority which is competent according to the law of the State concerned.

Representation

Article 153

Professional representation

(1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings before the European Patent Office may, subject to the provisions of paragraph 5 below, only be undertaken by natural persons whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the said Office. (2) Any person having his registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States who, according to a certificate furnished by the central industrial property office of that State, is entitled to act professionally as a representative in patent matters before that office, may be entered on the list. Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by the certificate referred to above, which must specify the extent of such entitlement. (3) When, in any Contracting State, entitlement to act as a representative is not conditional upon the requirement of special professional qualifications, persons applying to be entered on the list who act as representatives in patent matters before the central industrial property office of the said State must have habitually acted as such for at least five years. Provided that, persons whose professional qualification to represent natural and legal persons in patent matters before the central industrial property office of one of the Contracting States is officially recognised in accordance with the regulations laid down by such State shall not be subject to the condition of having exercised the profession. The certificate referred to in the preceding paragraph must indicate that the applicant satisfies one of the conditions referred to in the present paragraph. (4) Persons whose names are entered on the list referred to in paragraph 1 may only act before the European Patent Office to the extent that they are entitled, within the terms of the certificate referred to in paragraph 2, to act as representatives in patent matters in the Contracting States in which they exercise their profession. (5) Representation before the European Patent Office may also be undertaken by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States and having his registered place of business within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a representative in patent matters.

ZWEITER VORENTWURF EINES ÜBEREINKOMMENS ÜBER EIN EUROPÄISCHES PATENTERTEILUNGSVERFAHREN

SECOND PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF A CONVENTION ESTABLISHING A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

SECOND AVANT-PROJET DE CONVENTION INSTITUANT UN SYSTÈME EUROPÉEN DE DÉLIVRANCE DE BREVETS

Page 115

REGIERUNGSKONFERENZ ÜBER DIE EINFÜHRUNG EINES EUROPÄISCHEN PATENTERTEILUNGSVERFAHREN INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS CONFERENCE INTERGOUVERNEMENTALE POUR L'INSTITUTION D'UN SYSTEME EUROPEEN DE DELIVRANCE DE BREVETS

ZWEITER VORENTWURF EINES ÜBEREINKOMMENS ÜBER EIN EUROPÄISCHES PATENTERTEILUNGSVERFAHREN

sowie ERSTER VORENTWURF EINER AUSFÜHRUNGSORDNUNG ZUM ÜBEREINKOMMEN ÜBER EIN EUROPÄISCHES PATENTERTEILUNGSVERFAHREN und ERSTER VORENTWURF EINER GEBÜHRENORDNUNG

SECOND PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF A CONVENTION ESTABLISHING A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

with FIRST PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS TO THE CONVENTION ESTABLISHING A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS and FIRST PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF THE RULES RELATING TO FEES

SECOND AVANT-PROJET DE CONVENTION INSTITUANT UN SYSTÈME EUROPÉEN DE DÉLIVRANCE DE BREVETS ainsi que PREMIER AVANT-PROJET DE RÈGLEMENT D'EXÉCUTION DE LA CONVENTION INSTITUANT UN SYSTÈME EUROPÉEN DE DÉLIVRANCE DE BREVETS. et PREMIER AVANT-PROJET DE RÈGLEMENT RELATIF AUX TAXES

Page 116

(w) Articles 152 to 154 - Professional representation, compulsory representation and authorisation The question of representation should be discussed later (see point 78 above). (x) Article 159 - Period within which a request for examination may be made during a transitional period Should the Administrative Council's option be maintained of shortening the period for making the request for examination, the length of which still has to be specified for a transitional period? (Article 159, paragraph 1, second sentence? (CPCCI, FICPI) 81. Item 6 on the agenda: Discussion of procedure for the 4th Meeting of the Intergovernmental Conference from 20 to 30 April 1971

The Working Party discussed the question of how the results of their work and of the work of the Sub-Committees should profitably be dealt with at the next Meeting of the Conference. In this connection it considered that the delegations to the Intergovernmental Conference should be requested to submit in writing any requests for amendments to the texts.

Item 7 on the agenda: Other business 82. The Working Party agreed as follows for its future programme of work:

The reports of the delegations of Working Party I and of the General Rapporteur on amendments to the pablished First Preliminary Draft of 1970, which were to be submitted to the Conference, should reach the Secretariat by

Page 117

80. Apart from the textual amendments referred to under point 79, the Working Party decided to undertake no immediate amendment to the Preliminary Draft on the basis of the observations made by the international organisations, but to adopt the procedure set out under point 77 (recommendation to the Inter-Governmental Conference). The points on which the Working Party recommends acceptance or rejection of the proposals made by the international organisations can be found in the above-mentioned document BR/100/71. The only problems set out below are those for which the Working Party is to recommend further examination. (a) Article 9 - Patentable inventions

Possible new text for Article 9, paragraph 2, especially sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (e) (observations by CEIF and UNICE); (b) Article 11, paragraphs 2 and 3 - Novelty

Should the expression "contents of earlier applications for European patents" in Article 11, paragraph 3 be aligned more closely on the Strasbourg Convention of 27.11 .1963 , by being replaced by "contents of applications for European patents, which have earlier filing dates ..."? (FICPI) (c) Article 11, paragraph 3 - Novelty

Should an earlier European application form an obstacle to the grant of a European patent under Article 11, paragraph 3 even where the inventor is the same person in both cases? [So-called Self-collision (FICPI) 7

The Swedish delegation was asked in this connection to establish by the next meeting whether real difficulties had arisen in the Scandinavian countries in this context.

Page 118

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 6th April 1971 BR/94/71

- Secretariat -

MINUTES of the 7th meeting of Working Party I held at Luxembourg from 26 to 29 January 1971

Item 1 on the agenda (1): Opening of the meeting and adoption of the provisional agenda

1. The Working Party held its seventh meeting at Luxembourg from Tuesday 26 to Thursday 28 January 1971 with Dr. HAERTEL, President of the German Patent Office, in the Chair.

The meeting was attended by representatives of the Commission of the European Communities, WIPO/OMPI and the International Patent Institute (2). The representative of the General Secretariat of the Council of Europe sent his apologies for being unable to attend.

2. The Drafting Committee, under the Chairmanship of the President of the Netherlands "Octrooiraad", Mr J.V. VAN BENTHEM, held its meetings directly after the deliberations of the Working Party, and also on the morning of 29 January 1971.

(1) For the provisional agenda (BR/GT I/101/71), see Annex I. (2) For the list of those attending the meeting of the Working Party, see Annex II.

BR/94 e/71 son/KM/prk ..../....

Representation

Article 152 (former Article 171) Professional representation (1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings before the European Patent Office may, subject to the provisions of paragraph 5 below, only be undertaken by natural persons whose names appear on a list maintained for this purpose by the said Office. (2) Any person having his registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States who, according to a certificate furnished by the central industrial property office of that State, is entitled to act professionally as a representative in patent matters before that office, may be entered on the list. Entry shall be effected upon request, accompanied by the certificate referred to above, which must specify the extent of such entitlement. (3) When, in any Contracting State, entitlement to act as a representative is not conditional upon the requirement of special professional qualifications, persons applying to be entered on the list who act as representatives in patent matters before the central industrial property office of the said State must have habitually acted as such for at least five years. Provided that, persons whose professional qualification to represent natural and legal persons in patent matters before the central industrial property office of one of the Contracting States is officially recognised in accordance with the regulations laid down by such State shall not be subject to the condition of having exercised the profession. The certificate referred to in the preceding paragraph must indicate that the applicant satisfies one of the conditions referred to in the present paragraph. (4) Persons whose names are entered on the list referred to in paragraph 1 may only act before the European Patent Office to the extent that they are entitled, within the terms of the certificate referred to in paragraph 2, to act as representatives in patent matters in the Contracting States in which they exercise their profession. (5) Representation before the European Patent Office may also be undertaken by any legal practitioner qualified in one of the Contracting States, and having his registered place of business within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a representative in patent matters.

Notes to Article 152 :

1. The State in which the European Patent Office is located will have to take the necessary steps, in good time, to enable representatives who are nationals of other Contracting States to establish a registered place of business in its own territory.

The Working Party will later draft a provision to this effect which must appear in the Convention. 2. The provisions of this Article will be re-examined in the light of discussions with the interested circles.

Page 120

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 21 December 1970 B R / 70 / 70

- Secretariat -

FIRST PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF A CONVENTION ESTABLISHING A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS (Articles drafted by Working Parties I, II, III and IV)

Page 121

48. It was also pointed out that representatives must have the possibility of establishing a registered place of business in the State in which the EPO is located. A provision to this effect would have to be included in the Convention.

Article 172 - Compulsory representation 49. With reference to paragraph 2 the Working Party turned down a proposal of the Netherlands' delegation that compulsory representation be extended to all persons, wherever their registered place of business or residence might be.

The contrary proposal of the British delegation, that there should be no provision for compulsory representation at all, was also rejected by the Working Party.

The Working Party agreed to limited compulsory representation in the sense that only persons having neither registered place of business nor residence within the territory of a Contracting State must be represented before the EPO. 50. In the case of the representative having been appointed, exceptionally, only for the duration of the proceedings for grant, the Working Party considered it is self-evident that the EPO could communicate an opposition to the patentee himself; there was no need to make special provision for this case. 51. As regards the scope of compulsory representation as regulated in paragraph 3, several possibilities were suggested: (i) compulsory representation for certain procedural steps only, to be specified individually; (ii) no compulsory registration, but requirement to name an address for service with which the EPO could correspond.

Page 122

44. The Swiss delegation proposed that legal persons should also be allowed to undertake representation, since this was in accordance with Swiss custom. Other delegations were unable to accept this proposal.

The Working Party came to the conclusion that a practical solution to the problem raised might be that those members of the leading bodies of legal persons who intend to appear before the EPO should have themselves entered on the list referred to in paragraph 1.

The Swiss delegation reserved the right to return to the question at a later date. 45. Paragraph 3 was drafted so as to cover a peculiarity of French law. In French law there are persons who hold the same professional qualifications as patent agents but who appear under the name of their employer before the French patent authorities, rather than under their own name. For such persons it seemed unjust to demand five years of independent professional practice. 46. With reference to paragraph 3, the Swiss delegation observed that the requirement of five years' professional practice was unjust in the case of a person who, having worked for several years for a patent agency before becoming independent, was unable to prove that he had had five years' independent professional experience.

The Working Party was of the opinion that the national authorities for the protection of industrial property had a certain discretion in the issuing of the necessary certificate, which would allow them also to take into account professional experience in the employment of a patent agency. 47. With regard to paragraph 5 , it was agreed that the expression "legal practitioner" covered both barristers and solicitors under English law. B R / 4: 9 e/70 ght/PA/ft

Page 123

whereby a decision of the EPO taxing costs or determining a fine would be enforceable in accordance with the legislative provisions of the Contracting State in which the enforcement takes place, in the same way as a judgement of a Court of that State. 40. For the rest, the Working Party agreed to examine Article 170 further with government legal experts.

Chapter IV - Representation Article 171 - Professional representation 41. It was generally recognised that these provisions should be re-examined after the matter had been discussed with the interested circles. 42. With reference to paragraph 1, the Working Party made it clear that legal practitioners fulfilling the conditions laid down in paragraph 5 need not appear on the list maintained by the EPO, in order to be allowed to undertake representation before the EPO. 43. The British delegation proposed that paragraph 1 be radically simplified and a provision made, following Article 49 of the PCT, that all persons having the right to practise before the national patent offices should also be entitled to practise before the EPO, provided that they were able, if requested, to prove their qualifications.

This proposal was rejected by the majority of the delegations. In their estimation it would represent a retrograde step on the 1965 Draft, which in certain cases insisted on proof of five years in professional practice. It was pointed out that the organisations of patent agents in particular attached great importance to this proof of professional practice.

Page 124

INTER-GOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE FOR THE SETTING UP OF A EUROPEAN SYSTEM FOR THE GRANT OF PATENTS

Brussels, 26 October 1970 BR / 49 / 70

- Secretariat -

MINUTES

of the meeting of Working Party I Luxembourg, 7 - 11 September 1970

Agenda item 1 (1): Opening of the meeting and adoption of the provisional agenda

1. The fifth working meeting of Working Party I was held at Luxembourg from Monday 7 to Friday 11 September 1970, with Dr. HAERTEL, President of the German Patent Office, in the Chair.

Representatives of the Commission of the European Communities, WIPO-BIRPI and the International Patent Institute took part in the meeting (2). The representative of the General Secretariat of the Council of Europe sent his apologies for being unable to attend. 2. The Drafting Committee, under the Chairmanship of the President of the Netherlands "Octrooiraad", Mr. J.B. van BENTHEM, held its meetings directly after the meetings of the Working Party. (1) See Annex I for provisional agenda (BR/GT 1/51/70) (2) See Annex II for list of those attending the meeting of the Working Party.

BR/49 e/70 eld/PA/bcc

Page 125

Article 165. M. Corvos reposu de modifier le prenior parigrocho afin que la tase do rocuurs puisse ggalenent faire l'objot d'une répartition des frale. Il s'agit bien ici d'une tase de recours qui aurait été payée par un des prticipants, qui est en partie réclamée à l'autre.

Après une discussion, le groupe estima quo cette proposition ne causerait pas de difficultés supplémentaires à l'office et s'y rallie.

Le Comité de rédaction est chargé d'introduire au paragraphe 1 une disposition visant les seules taxes de recours.

Les articles 164 à 168 sont transmis au Comité de rédaction.

Article 170. A la suite d'une question posée par M. Corves, le groupe décide de supprimer le paragraphe 4 qui constitue une immixtion dans les droits nationaux.

L'article est transmis au Comité de rédaction. Article 171. Au sujet du paragraphe 5, M. Lemontey souligne la différence existant entre le not "avocat" et le not "Rechtsanwalt". Il propose que, dans le texte frangais de ce paragraphe, le not "avocat" soit remplacé par une expression plus large telle que p.ex. "toute personne qui a pouvoir légal de représentation auprès des juridictions nationales". Le groupe se rallie à cette proposition.

L'article est transmis au Comité de rédaction qui veillera cependant à ce que l'expression employée dans le texte français ne dépasse pas la notion allomanda de "Rechtsanwalt".

Article 174. A la suite d'une question posee par M. Corves au sujot du paragraphe 1, le Président est amené à préciser le sens de ce paragraphe.

Deuxième Partie : COMPTES RENDUS

Avant-projet de convention relatif à un droit européen des brevets

Page 127

GROUPE DE TRAVAIL " Brevets "

Bruxelles, le 15 mars 1963. Confidentiel

Résultats de la septième session du groupe de travail " Brevets " qui s'est tenue à Bruxelles du 11 au 22 février 1963

Page 128

délivrée par le service central de la propriété industrielle de l'un de ces Etats, à exercer professionnellement la représentation en matière de brevets d'invention devant ledit service. L'inscription est faite sur requête accompagnée de l'attestation susvisée qui doit préciser l'étendue de l'habilitation. (3) Lorsque, dans un Etat contractant, l'habilitation à représenter n'est pas subordonnée à l'exigence d'une qualification professionnelle spéciale, les requérants qui exercent la représentation en matière de brevets devant le service central de la propriété industrielle dudit Etat doivent avoir exercé cette représentation, à tire habituel, pendant cinq ans au moins. En pareil cas, l'attestation visée au pragraphe précédent doit indiquer que le requérant satisfait à cette exigence. (4) Les représentants inscrits sur la liste visée au paragraphe 1 ne peuvent assurer une représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets que dans la mesure où ils peuvent, aux termes de l'attestation prévue au paragraphe 2, assurer une représentation en matière de brevets d'invention dans l'Etat contractant où ils exercent leur activité. (5) La représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets peut être assurée en outre par tout avocat inscrit à un barreau de l'un des Etats contractants et ayant son domicile professionnel dans cet Etat, dans la mesure où il peut assurer dans ledit Etat une représentation en matière de brevets.

Remarque

Cet article devra être éventuellement modifié pour tenir compte de la création ou de la modification de dispositions nationales en matière de représentation devant les services nationaux de propriété industrielle.

Article 172 Représentation obligatoire (1) Sous réserve de dispositions des paragraphes suivants, nul n'est tenu de se faire représenter devant l'Office européen des brevets. (2) Les personnes physiques et morales qui n'ont ni établissement ni domicile sur le territoire de l'un des Etats contractants doivent être représentées dans toute procédure devant l'Office européen des brevets. Au terme de la procédure, le représentant du titulaire du brevet européen demeure habilité à recevoir valablement toute notification relative à ce brevet, à moins que ledit titulaire n'ait fait une autre élection de domicile sur le territoire de l'un des Etats contractants. (3) Les demandes de brevet, les requêtes et les recours des personnes visées au paragraphe 2 ne peuvent être déposés que par l'intermédiaire du représentant. En cas d'inobservation de la présente disposition, la demande de brevet, la requête ou le recours est réputé non avenu. (4) Le représentant visé au paragraphe 2 est inscrit dans le registre européen des brevets. Tout représentant inscrit qui a cessé d'être mandaté continue à être considéré comme tel aussi longtemps qu'il demeure inscrit au registre.

Page 129

Les Etats contractants peuvent prendre toutes mesures tendant à assister les titulaires de demandes ou de brevets européens et les parties à une procédure d'annulation de brevets européens définitifs pour le paiement des taxes, autres que la taxe de dépôt et les taxes annuelles, et pour le paiement des autres frais de procédure, dans la mesure où ces personnes ne sont pas à même de les payer, faute de ressources suffisantes. Ces mesures ne peuvent être prises qu'en faveur des personnes physiques ressortissant de l'Etat intéressé ou domiciliées sur son territoire.

Remarque

La majorité du groupe de travail s'est prononcéa pour la lère variante.

Article 170

Exécution forcés en matière de frais et d'amendes (1) Les décisions de l'Office européen des brevets fixant le montant des frais de procédure, infligeant une amende ou constatant le défaut de paiement des taxes annuelles au sens de l'article 123, forment titre exécutoire; cette disposition n'est pas applicable aux Etats. (2) L'exécution forcée est régie par les règles de la procédure civile en vigueur dans l'Etat contractant sur le territoire duquel elle a lieu. La formule exécutoire est apposée, sans autre contrôle que celui de l'authenticité du titre, par l'autorité nationale que le gouvernement de chacun des Etats contractants désignera à cet effet et dont il donnera connaissance à l'Office européen des brevets. (3) Après l'accomplissement de ces formalités à la demande de l'intéressé, celui-ci peut poursuivre l'exécution forcée en saisissant directement l'organe compétent suivant la législation nationale. (4) L'exécution forcée ne peut être suspendue qu'en vertu d'une décision de l'Office européen des brevets ou de la Cour européenne des brevets. Toutefois, le contrôle de la régularité des mesures d'exécution relève de la compétence des juridictions nationales.

REPRESENTATION

Article 171 Représentation professionnelle (1) La représentation des personnes physiques et morales dans les procédures devant l'Office européen des brevets ne peut être assurée que par les personnes physiques inscrites sur la liste établie à cet effet par ledit office. (2) Peut être inscrite sur la liste toute personne ayant son domicile professionnel sur le territoire de l'un des Etats contractants et habilitée, selon une attestation

Page 130

COMITE DE COORDINATION EN MATIERE DE PROPRIETE INDUSTRIELLE INSTITUE PAR LES ETATS MEMBRES ET LA COMMISSION DE LA COMMUNAUTE ECONOMIQUE EUROPEENNE

X INIERUNGSAUSSCHUSSAUF DEM GEBIET EVERBLICHEN RECHTSSCHUTZES EIN- :T VON DEN MITGLIEDSTAATEN UND JMMISSION DER EUROPÄISCHEN WIRTSCHAFTSGEMEINSCHAFT

COMITATO DI COORCINAMENTO IN MATERIA DI PROPRIETÀ INDUSTRIALE ISTITUITO DABLI STATI MEMBRI E DALLA COMMISSIONE DELLA COMUNITÀ ECONOMICA EUROPEA

COORDINATIE-COMITE OP HET GEBIED VAN DE INDUSTRIELE EIGENDOM INGESTELO DOOR DE LID-STATEN EN DE COMMISSIE VAN DE EUROPESE ECONOMISCHE GEMEENSCHAP

AVANT-PROJET DE CONVENTION

relatif à un droit européen des brevets élaboré par le groupe de travail «brevets»

VORENTWURF EINES ABKOMMENS

über ein europäisches Patentrecht ausgearbeitet von der Arbeitsgruppe „Patente"

SCHEMA DI CONVENZIONE

sul diritto europeo dei brevetti predisposto dal Gruppo di lavoro «brevetti»

VOORONTWERP VERDRAG

betreffende een Europees octrooirecht opgesteld door de werkgroep «octrooien»

Textes allemand et français Deutscher und französischer Text

Page 131

professional patent agent before that office, may be entered in the list. Entry is effected upon request, accompanied by the certificate referred to above, which must specify the extent of such entitlement. (3) When, in a Contracting State, the qualification to act as an agent is not conditional upon the requirement of special professional qualifications, persons who act as agents before the central industrial property office of the said State must have habitually acted as such for at least five years. In such cases, the certificate specified in the preceding paragraph must indicate that the applicant satisfies this requirement. (4) Agents whose names are entered on the list referred to in paragraph (1) may only act before the European Patent Office to the extent that they are entitled, within the terms of the certificate referred to in paragraph (2), to act as patent agents in the Contracting State in which they exercise their profession. (5) Representation before the European Patent Office may be undertaken by any lawyer called to the Bar in one of the Contracting States, and having his professional office within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a representative in patent matters.

Note: This Article may have to be modified to take account of new or aiuended national provisions in the matter of representation before national industrial property offices.

Article 172. Compulsory representation (1) Subject to the provisions of the following paragraphs, no person is compelled to be represented before the European Patent Office. (2) Natural and legal persons who have neither a place of business nor residence within the territory of one of the Contracting States must be represented in all proceedings before the European Patent Office by a patent agent. Upon conclusion of the proceedings, the authority of the patent agent to receive all communications concerning the patent, shall be legally maintained, unless the proprietor of the European patent has acquired an address for service within the territory of one of the Contracting States. (3) Applications for patents, requests and appeals by persons referred to in paragraph (2) can only be lodged through a patent agent. Failure to observe this requirement will result in the application for a patent, the request, or the appeal being deemed not to have been made. (4) The patent agent referred to in paragraph (2) will be entered in the European Register of Patents. Any agent so entered and who ceases to be authorised will continue to be regarded as the patent agent for such time as his name remains entered on the Register.

Article 173. Authorisations

(1) Patent agents acting as such before the European Patent Office must produce an authorisation in writing. (2) If several agents are authorised they may, notwithstanding any contrary provisions in the authorisation, act either jointly or individually. (3) Unless an authorisation contains provision to the contrary, it will not terminate upon the death of the person who issued it.

Page 132

(4) The competent authority of a Contracting State will only issue certificates to physical persons who are nationals of said State or ordinarily resident on its territory. (5) The fees and other expenses from which an applicant secures exemption will be reimbursed to the European Patent Office by the Contracting State whose competent authority issued the certificate. (6) Contracting States are not bound to issue the certificates provided for by this Article.

2nd Variant

Contracting States may take any measure designed to assist applicants for and proprietors of European patents and parties to proceedings for the revocation of final European Patents in respect of the payment of fees, other than application fee and renewal fees, and for the payment of other costs of proceedings, in so far as such persons are not in a position to pay them, owing to insufficient means. These measures can only be taken in favour of physical persons who are nationals of the State concerned, or ordinarily resident on its territory.

Note: The majority of the Working Party were in favour of the first variant.

Article 170. Enforcement of costs and fines

(1) Decisions of the European Patent Office taxing costs of proceedings, imposing a fine, or establishing failure to pay renewal fees within the meaning of Article 123, are themselves enforceable; this provision does not apply to States. (2) Enforcement shall be regulated by the rules of civil procedure in the Contracting State in whose territory the enforcement takes place. The enforcement order will be issued, without further requirement other than that of the authenticity of the document, by the national authority which the government of each of the Contracting States will designate for this purpose, and of which the European Patent Office shall be informed. (3) After the completion of these formalities at the request of the interested party, the latter may levy distraint by direct application to the competent authority in accordance with national law. (4) Enforcement can only be stayed by a decision of the European Patent Office or the European Patent Court. However, national courts shall be competent to investigate the validity of such enforcement measures.

Article 171. Professional Patent agents

(1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings before the European Patent Office can only be undertaken by natural persons whose names appear in the list maintained for this purpose by the said Office. (2) Any person having his registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States and who, according to a certificate furnished by the central industrial property office of one of such States, is entitled to act as a

Page 133

BOARD OF TRADE

Translation of a Draft Convention relating to a European Patent Law

LONDON HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE FIVE SHILLINGS NET

Page 134

Article 167 (216) Le groupe décide de maintenir les deux variantes et la remarque disant que la majorité s'est prononcée en faveur de la première.

Article 168 (157) L'article est adopté. Il sera soumis à l'avis des experts des ministères de la justice. Article 169 (159) Le Frégidort rappelle au groupe que l'idée de base de cat artiole consiste à prévoir que la représentation devant l'Office européen sera la même que celle devant les offices nationaux. Heis l'application de cette idée ne va pas sans difficultés en raison des différences entre la qualité des représentants de pays à pays et aussi en raison des différences entre la procédure nationale et la procédure européenne. Ce problème pourra utilement être discuté devant le comité de coordination qui pourrait notamment examiner si cet article ne pourrait pas être complété de façon à permettre aux Etats de réglementer la représentation des personnes devant les offices nationaux. M. Fressonnet signale à son tour que le problème de la représentation soulève sur le plan national même de réelles difficultés. Les avocats se sentant menacés dans leur monopole de la plaidoirie. L'exception de nullité étant presque toujours soulevée, ils ne souffriraient pas que les ingénieurs-conseils puissent intervenir directement devant les tribunaux. Ainsi propose-t-il de maintenir seulement le texte du paragraphe 1 et de renvoyer à un règlement ultérieur l'établissement de la liste des représentants autorisés devant l'Office. Les paragraphes 2 à 5 ne consisteraient dans ces conditions qu'un essai de règlementation. Mais cette proposition n'est pas retenue. Le Président, avec l'accord du groupe décide que la remarque sera rédigée de telle façon qu'elle ne fasse pas allusion à la réserve d'une délégation, mais davantage à une réserve générale sur les possibilités de modifier cet article étant donné l'évolution même des législations nationales en la matière.

Page 135

GROUPE DE TRAVAIL " Brevets "

Bruxelles, le 31 juillet 1962 Confidentiel

Résultats de la sixième session du groupe de travail " Brevets " qui s'est tenue à Munich du 13 au 23 juin 1962

Page 136

Chapitre IV
Représentation
Article 169 (159)
Représentation professionnelle

(1) La représentation des personnes physiques et morales dans les procédures devant l'Office européen des brevets ne peut être assurée que par les personnes physiques inscrites sur la liste établie à cet effet par ledit Office. (2) Peut être inscrite sur la liste toute personne ayant son domicile professionnel sur le territoire de l'un des Etats contractants et habilitée, selon une attestation délivrée par le service central de la propriété industrielle de l'un de ces Etats, à exercer professionnellement la représentation en matière de brevets d'invention devant ledit service. L'inscription est faite sur requête accompagnée de l'attestation susvisée qui doit préciser l'étendue de l'habilitation. (3) Lorsque, dans un Etat contractant, l'habilitation à représenter n'est pas subordonnée à l'exigence d'une qualification professionnelle spéciale, les requérants qui exercent la représentation en matière de brevets devant le service central de la propriété industrielle dudit Etat doivent avoir exercé cette représentation, à titre habituel, pendant cinq ans au moins. En pareil cas, l'attestation visée au paragraphe précédent doit indiquer que le requérant satisfait à cette exigence. (4) Les représentants inscrits sur la liste visée au paragraphe 1 ne peuvent assurer une représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets que dans la mesure où ils peuvent, aux termes de l'attestation prévue au paragraphe 2 , assurer une représentation en matière de brevets d'invention dans l'Etat contractant où ils exercent leur activité. (5) La représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets peut être assurée en outre par tout avocat inscrit à un barreau de l'un des Etats contractants et ayant son domicile professionnel dans cet Etat, dans la mesure où il peut assurer dans ledit Etat une représentation en matière de brevets.

Remarque : Une délégation a réservé sa position sur les paragraphes 2 à 5.

AVANT-PROJET DE CONVENTION
RELATIF A
UN DROIT EUROPEEN DES BREVETS

=V E Mai 1962

Page 138

L'article 157 est adopté.

Article 159

La délégation française est d'accord pour maintenir cet article dans la Convention même. A sa demande, une remarque sera introduite précisant que le paragraphe 1 est adopté a l'unanimité tandis que la délégation française ne peut pas encore donner son accord au sujet des paragraphes 2 à 5 .

Article 160

Le Comité de rédaction est chargé d'examiner ces dispositions pour préparer la discussion du groupe lors de la prochaine session à Munich.

Les articles 161,162 et 164 sont adoptés. L'article 165 a été rayé par le groupe au début de la session. L'article 166 est adopté.

Article 191

Les crochets peuvent être supprimés et la remarque doit être modifiée de façon à indiquer que cette disposition doit être soumise a l'examen des experts des Ministères de la Justice.

Article 192

Le Comité de rédaction a déjà pris position au sujet de cet article. Le groupe en discutera lors de la prochaine session.

L'article 193 est adopté.

Article 211

La remarque est maintenue. L'article 221 est adopté.

Article 241

Pour tenir compte de la réserve de la délégation française, la première

Deuxième Partie : COMPTES RENDUS

Avant-projet de convention relatif à un droit européen des brevets

Page 140

GROUPE DE TRAVAIL " Brevets "

Bruxelles, le 22 mai 1962. Confidentiel

Résultats de la cinquième session du groupe de travail " Brevets" qui s'est tenue à Bruxelles du 2 au 18 avril 1962

IV/282/62-F

Bruxelles, le 11 janvier 1962

Article 159
Représentation professionnelle

(1) La représentation des personnes physiques et morales dans los procédures devant l'Office européen des brevets ne peut être assurée que par les personnes physiques inscrites sur la liste établie à cet effed par ledit Office. (2) Peut être inscrite sur la liste toute personne ayant son domicile professionnel sur le territoire de l'un des Etats contractants et habi– litée, selon une attestation délivrée par je service contral de la propriété industrielle de l'un de ces Etats, à exercer professionnellement la représentation en matière de brevets d'invention devant ledit service. L'inscription est faite sur requête accompagnée de l'attestation susvisée qui doit préciser l'étendue de l'habilitation. (3) Lorsque, dans un Etat contractant, l'habilitation à représenter n'est pas subordonnée à l'exigence d'une qualification professionnelle spéciale, los requérants qui exercent la représentation en matière de brevet devant le service central de la propriété industrielle dudit Etat doivent avoir exercé cette représentation, à titre habituel, pendant [oing] ans au moins. En pareil cas, l'attestation visée au paragraphe précedent doit indiquer que le requérant satisfait à cette exigence. (4) Les représentants inscrits sur la liste visée au paragraphe 1 ne peuvent assurer une représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets que dans la mesure où ils peuvent, auxpoumede de' 3 thitestation' prevusutit paraprathsafie, assurer une représentation en matière de brevets d'invention dans l'Etat contractant où ils exercent leur activité. (5) La représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets, peut être assurée en outre par tout avocat inscrit à un Barreau de l'un des Etats contractants et ayant son domicile professionnel dans cet Etat, dans la mesure où il peut assurer dans ledit Etat une représentation en matière de brevets.

Remarque :

Une délégation n'a pas été en mesure de donner son accord sur le paragraphe 1 do cet article.

Page 142

GROUPE DE TRAVAIL " Brevets "

Première Partie : T E X T E S

Avant-projet de convention relatif à un droit européen des brevets

Page 143

GROUPE DE TRAVAIL " Brevets "

Bruxelles, le 1 février 1962 Confidentiel

Résultats de la quatriline session du groupe de travail " Brevets " qui s'est tenue à Bruxelles du 8 au 19 janvier 1962

Page 144

alors que d'autros ne peuvent représenter que les personnes domicilices en Allemagne.

A la suite d'une intervention de M. van Bonthem et d'une autre de M. Pfanner, il est décidé que tout ce qui concerne les dispositions disciplinaires relatives aux représentants ainsi que colles relatives aux cas de démissions et de décès, par exemple, trouveront leur place dans le règlement d'exécution.

L'article 159 est transmis au Comité de rédaction. Au cours de la discussion de l'article 160, le groupe reviendra a l'article 159 au sujet des avocats et chargera le Comitó de rédaction d'établir un nouveau paragraphe à leur propos. La relation de cette discussion figure plus loin dans le présent procès-verbal.

Discussion de l'article 160 de l'avant-projet.

Le Président expose que cet article exige que toute personne qui ne réside pas sur le territoire de l'un des six Etats se fasse obligatoirement représenter devant l'Office européen. De plus, l'existence de cet article n'est pas liée à l'adoption du principe de la porte ouverte. En effet, il vaut également pour les ressortissants des pays contractants résidant en dehors du territoire de ces pays.

Le problème du représentant obligatoire peut se résoudre de deux manières. Soit en l'imposant pour tous les actes, soit en ne l'imposant que pour les actes de procédure et non pour la réception des notifications émanant de l'Office. Dans son avant-projet, le Président a choisi la solution la plus sévère, celle qui impose d'une façon absolue l'intermédiaire d'un représentant obligatoire.

Le groupe discute tout d'abord une question posée par M. de Muyser sur le point de savoir si l'inventeur résidant en-dehors des Etats contractants ne pourrait effoctuer le dépôt par voie postale quitte à prendre un représentant obligatoire pour la suite de la procédure.

Page 145

GROUPE DE TRAVAIL "Brevets"

Session du 8 au 19 janvier 1962.

Comptc rondu de la séance du 11 janvier 1962.

Discussion de l'article 159 de l'avant-projet (suite)

Le Président ouvre la séance à 9.30 heures et résume les décisions d'hier relatives aux représentants professionnels. Tout d'abord, ne seront admis devant l'Office européen des brevets que les représentants admis devant les offices nationaux. Cette admission sora attestée par les autorités nationales. De plus, le pouvoir do représenter résultora de l'inscription sur une liste établie à cet effet par l'Office européen. Infin, une disposition devra figurer à l'article 159 pour les pays qui n'ont pas de réglementation professionnelle dans ce domaine. Cette disposition spécifiera que souls seront admis les représentants professionnels qui auront exercé leur profession auprès d'un officó national des brevets pendant un certain nombre d'années et qui le prouveront.

Un échange de vues a lieu au sujot du nombro d'années oxigées. Il est décidé de retenir a titre provisoiro un dölai de cinq ans. Ce chiffre figurera entre crochets afin que les délégations puissent consulter les milieux intéressés et se prononcer définitivement lors do la prochaine session.

Le Président précise que le paragraphe 2 établissant l'amplour identique de la représentation sur le plan national ot sur le plan européen viso un problème allemand où cortaines personnes pouvent représenter quiconque

Page 146

1  V / 215 / 62-F

- 37 -

La proposition de M. de Nuyser est acceptée sous réserve d'une nouvelle discussion.

Le groupe rejette cependant l'idée de prévoir l'exigence d'avoir pratiqué la profession à bureau ouvert, ainsi que la distinction entre universitaires et non-universitaires.

La séance est levée a 18.15 heures.

Page 147

devant les offices nationaux pourront également comparaitre devant l'Office curopéen. Do plus, les persennes admises comme représentants professionnels devant l'Office curopéen peuvent également être appelées à comparaitre en tant que représentants obligatoires de ressortissants des pays tiors. Dans ce cas, il est indispensable qu'elles aient un domicile dans les pays membres qui puisse servir d'adresse de signification.

Le groupe so met d'accord de n'exiger à l'article 158 que la condition du domicile d'affairssdans un des Etats membres de la Convention européenne. L'alternative du domicile personnel est rayé. La discussion de l'article 158 est provisoirement terminée.

Discussion de l'article 159 de l'avant-projet.

Le Président expose que cet article part de l'idée que toute personne autorisée à pratiquer professionnellement la représentation devantles offices nationaux peuvent le faire également devant l'Office européen à condition qu'elles aient leur domicile d'affaires dans un des Etats contractants. Pour être inscrit sur la liste do l'Office curopéen des représentants professionnels, une attestation de l'administration nationale sera requise.

Le Président soumet à l'appréciation du groupe la proposition de M. de Muyser d'exiger en outre une attestation de l'administration nationale portant sur le fait que l'intéressé a exercé la profession de représentant pendant un certain temps. Cette condition additionnelle ne devrait valoir que pour les représentants provenant de pays qui ne possèdent pas encore de réglementation professionnelle à ce sujet.

GRGUPE DE TRAVAIL

" Brevets "

Deuxième Partie : COMPTES RENDUS

Avant-projet de convention relatif à un droit européen des brevets

Page 149

GROUPE DE TRAVAIL " Brevets "

Bruxelles, le 1 février 1962 Confidentiel

Résultats de la quetriéres session du groupe de travail " Brevets " qui s'est tenue à Bruxelles du 8 au 19 janvier 1962

Page 150

procédure européenne. On pourrait envisager d'exiger, outre les conditions visées à l'art. 159, une qualification technique spéciale. On pourrait considérer comme qualification technique des études universitaires complètes dans le domaine du droit, des sciences naturelles, de la technique ou de l'agriculture, ou encore une formation complète dans un institut supérieur d'enseignement technique. Il serait certes difficile de trouver des critères uniformes d'admission. C'est pourquoi il serait peut-être opportun de renoncer provisoirement à cette condition supplémentaire, qui ne figurerait que dans la règlementation ultérieure mentionnée au début du présent commentaire et arrêtée dans le cadre de I'harmonisation des dispositions nationales ou de la création d'un droit européen applicable aux représentants devant l'Office européen des brevets.

Page 151

La solution proposée à l'art. 159 en ce qui concerne la représentation à titre professionnel est très libérale du point de vue de la règlementation juridique des professions, car elle se borne à projeter sur le plan européen la situation existant dans les Etats contractants, sans ordonner aucune limitation plus stricte. Selon cette solution: les mandants sur le plan européen auraient la possibilité de choisir librement parmi les représentants professionnels de tous les Etats. On pourrait examiner s'il ne conviendrait pas de prévoir pendant une période transitoire qu'un représentant professirnnel ne pourrait représenter devant l'Office européen des brevets, le demandeur dont le siège ou le domicile est situé dans un des Etats membres que s'il peut également représenter ce demandeur devant. l'autorite nationale de l'Etat contractant dans lequel celui-ci a son siège ou son domicile. Ceci constituerait pour ainsi dire un système des "pays fermés", le demandeur dont le domicile est situé en Allemagne pouvant être représenté seulement par un agent de brevets allemanc et le demandeur dont le domicile est en France seulement par un ingénieur conseil français. Les demandeurs dont le siège ou le domicile serait situé hors du territoire des Etats Contractants pourraient toutefois également être représentés, selon cette solution, par tout représentant professionnel admis auprès de lIOffice européen des brevets. On pourrait reprocher à cette solution de ne pas coïncider entièrement avec les objectifs de la libre circulation des services à l'intérieur du marché commun, tels qu'ils sont prévus aux articles 59 et suivants du traité de la C.E.E. Cette solution ne devrait donc être envisagée que pendant une période transitnire.

La solution proposée à l'art. 159 pourrait peut-être ne pas être jugée satisfaisante, parce qu'elle autoriserait à exercer une représentation à titre professionnel devant l'Office eurppéen des brevets une trop vaste catégorie de personnes, trop pu qualifiées pour la nouvelle

Page 152

relative à un droit européen des brevets. Il serait également congevable d'envisager à une date ultérieure une harmonisation des dispositions nationales en la matière.

Sur la base de ces considérations, il est proposé à l'art. 159 d'autoriser à pratiquer la représentation à titre professionnel auprès de l'Office européen des brevets, les personnes qui remplissent les conditions visées à l'art. 158 et sont habilitées à pratiquer la représentation à titre professionnel devant l'un des offices nationaux des brevets des Etats contractants. Le par. 2 précise que si une personne n'est habilitée à pratiquer la représentation à titre professionnel devant l'autorité nationale compétente que dans une oertaine mesure, elle ne peut également pratiquer cette représentation devant l'Office européen des brevets que dans la même mesure. Feut-être pourrait-on exiger en outre que pour être admis à pratiquer la représentation à titre professionnel auprès de l'Office européen des brevets, les intéressés aient déjà exercé leur profession pendant un certain temps auprès de l'Office national compétent des brevets.

Il est proposé, pour des raisons de pratique administrative, que le seul enregistrement sur une liste constitue l'autorisation d'exercer la représentation à titre professionnel. Cette mesure a pour but de faciliter la tâche de l'Office européen des brevets et de permettre au public d'obtenir des informations sûres. D'autre part, il est désirable que l'Office européen des brevets soit dispensé de vérifier si, et dans quelle mesure une personne est habilitée à exercer la représentation à titre professionnel devant l'autorité nationale compétente. C'est pourquoi il est proposé que ces conditions d'admission fassent l'objet d'une attestation établie par l'autorité nationale compétente.

Page 153

Ad article 159 Représentant professionnel

1) Documents de bace : 2) Remarques :

L'article 159 détermine les personnes autorisées à pratiquer la représentation à titre professionnel devant l'Office européen des brevets. Par représentation à titre professionnel on entend une représentation assurée à plusieurs reprises, contre rémunération. Il s'agit donc là de la législation applicable aux agents de brevets, aux avocats et avoués et aux autres représentants professionnels. Comme cette matière fait l'objet de règles différentes selon les Etats contractants et qu'il est naturellement impossible de réaliser actuellement un rapprochement des législations dans ce domaine, il a paru opportun de s'abstenir de donner à ce problème dans la convention relative à un droit ouropéen des brevets une "solution européenne" proprement dite. Il a cependant fallu trouver une réglementation provisoire car on ne peut envisager d'autoriser sans aucune limitation n'importe quelle personne à pratiquer la représentation à titre professionel devant l'Office européen des brevets, qui dans ce cas devrait travailler avec un nombre incalculable de représentants pour la plupart non qualifiés. C'est pourquol il a paru opportun de se borner actuellement à projeter sur le plan européen la situation qui existe actuellement dans le droit national. Telle est l'idée fondamentale sur laquelle repose la proposition relative à l'article 159. Les catégories de personnes qui sont actuellement habilitées à pratiquer la représentation à titre professionnel devant un office national des brevets seront également habilitées dans la même mesure à pratiquer la réprésentation à titre professionnel devant l'Office européen des brevets. - Au cas où l'on juzcrait nécessaire de fixer, dans une réglementation européenne, les conditions requises pour entrer dans la catégorie des représentants professionnels devant l'Office européen des brevets, cette règlementation dovrait être étudiés à une date ultérieure, c'ost-à-dire après l'entrée en vigueur de la convention

Page 154

Kurt Haertel

Bonn, le 15 novembre 1961

R E M A R Q U E S

concernant le promier avant-projet de convention relatif à un droit curopéen des brevets

Articlos 151 à 170 [Articlos 151 à 166

Page 155

Article 159

Représentant professionnel (1) Est autorisé à pratiquer professionnellement la représentation de personnes physiques et morales dans une procédure devant l'Office européen des brevets réglée par la présente convention ou son règlement d'exécution quiconque est inscrit sur la liste établie à cet effet par l'Office européen des brevets. Toute personne qui remplit les conditions de l'art. 158 et qui est habilitée à pratiquer professionnellement la représentation devant l'autorité centrale nationale de la protection industrielle de l'un des Etats contractants peut demander à être inscrite sur cette liste. Une attestation de l'autorité précitée indiquant l'étendue de l'habilitation à pratiquer la représentation doit être jointe à la demande. (2) Le représentant inscrit ne peut représenter les personnes physiques et morales devant l'Office européen des brevets que pour autant qu'il peut, d'après l'attestation mentionnée au § 1, les représenter devant l'autorité centrale nationale de la propriété industrielle:

Page 156

IV/8221/61-F Orig. : D

Kurt Haertel

Bonn, le 15 novembre 1961

CONFIDENTIEL

Premier avant-projet de convention relatif à un droit européen des brevets

Articles 151 à 170 [Articles 151 à 1657

Page 157

Artikel 165 Herr Corves schlligt oine Anderung des Absatzes 1 dahingehond vor, daB auch hinsichtlich ior Beschwerdegebühr eino Kostenverteilung möglich ist. Es handelt sich dabei um dio von einem wrfahrenaboteiligten gezahlte Beschwerdegebühr, die von einen andoren Verfahrensbeteiligten teilweise zu erstatten ist.

Nach einor Erörterung schlieBt sich die Gruppe dioser Ansicht an, da der Vorschlag keine zusätalichen Schwiorigkeiten verursache.

Der RedaktionszusschuB wird beaulitragt, in Absatz 1 eine entsprechende Bestimmung hinsichtlich der Beschwerdegebühr aufzunehmen.

Die Artikel 164 bis 168 werden an don RedaktionsausschuB überwioson.

Artikel 170

Im AnschluB einer Frage von Herrn Corves beschlieBt die Gruppe, Absatz 4 zu streichen, da er cino Einmischung in dio nationalen Rechtsvorschriften darstelle.

Der Artikel wird an don RedaktionsausschuB überwieson.

Artikel 171

Mit Bezug auf Absatz 5 betont Herr Lemontey den Unterschied, der zwischen dem französischen Ausdruck "avocat" und dem Wort "Rechtsanwalt" besteht. Er schlagt vor, in der französischen Fassung dieses Absatzes das Wort "avocat" durch einen umfassenderen Ausdruck, wie z.B. "jede Person, die eine gesetzliche Bofugnis zur Vertretung vor den nationalen Gerichten hat", zu ersetzen. Die Gruppe schließt sich diesem Vorschlag an.

Der Artikel wird an den Redaktionsusschuß überwiesen, der dafur sorgen soll, daB der im französischen Text verwendete Ausdruck nicht über den deutschen Begriff des "Rechtsanwalts" hinausgeht.

Artikel 174

Auf Grund niner Frage von Herrn Corves zu dem Inhalt von Absatz 1 sieht sich der Vorsitzende voranlaBt, den Sinn dieses Absatzes zu erklären.

Page 158

ARBEITSGRUPPE "Patente"

Zweiter Teil : SITZUNGSBERICHT

Vorentwurf eines Abkommens über ein europäisches Patentrecht

Page 159

ARBEITSGRUPPE "Patente"

Brüssel, den 5. April 1963 VERTRAULICH

Ergebnisse der siebenten Sitzung der Arbeitsgruppe "Patente" vom 11. bis 22. Febr. 1963 in Brüssel

Page 160

für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz eines der Vertragstaaten befugt ist, die berufsmässige Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor dieser Behbrde auszuüben. Die Eintragung erfolgt auf Grund eines Antrags, dem die oben genannte Bescheinigung beizufügen ist, aus der sich der Umfang der Vertretungsbefugnis ergeben muss. (3) Unterliegt in einem Vertragstaat die Vertretungsbefugnis nicht dem Erfordernis einer besonderen beruflichen Befähigung, so müssen die Antragsteller, die die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz dieses Staats wahrnehmen, diese Vertretung mindestens fünf Jahre lang regelmässig ausgeübt haben. In einem solchen Fall muss sich aus der im vorhergehenden Absatz genannten Bescheinigung ergeben, dass der Antragsteller diesem Erfordernis entspricht. (4) Die Vertreter, die in die in Absatz 1 vorgesehene Liste eingetragen sind, dürfen vor dem Europäischen Patentamt die Vertretung nur in dem Umfang wahrnehmen, in dem sie gemäss der in Absatz 2 vorgesehenen Bescheinigung die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts in dem Vertragstaat wahrnehmen können, in dem sie ihre Tätigkeit ausüben. (5) Die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann darüber hinaus von jedem Rechtsanwalt, der in einem der Vertragstaaten zugelassen ist und seinen Geschäftssitz in diesem Staat hat, in dem Umfang wahrgenommen werden, in dem er in diesem Staat die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts ausüben kann.

Bemerkung

Dieser Artikel muss gegebenenfalls geändert werden, um der Schaffung oder Veränderung nationaler Vorschriften über die Vertretung vor den nationalen Behörden auf dem Gebiet des gewerblichen Rechtsschutzes Rechnung zu tragen.

Artikel 172 Notwendiger Vertreter (1) Vorbehaltlich der Vorschriften der folgenden Absätze ist niemand verpflichtet, sich vor dem Europäischen Patentamt vertreten zu lassen. (2) Die natürlichen und juristischen Personen, die weder Sitz noch Wohnsitz im Gebiet eines der Vertragstaaten haben, müssen sich in jedem Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt vertreten lassen. Der Vertreter des Patentinhabers bleibt nach der Beendigung eines Verfahrens befugt, rechtswirksam jede Zustellung entgegenzunehmen, die sich auf das europäische Patent bezieht, soweit nicht der Patentinhaber in dem Gebiet eines der Vertragstaaten einen anderen Zustellungsbevollmächtigten bestellt hat. (3) Anmeldungen, Anträge und Beschwerden der in Absatz 2 genannten Personen können nur durch den Vertreter eingereicht werden. Bei Nichtbeachtung dieser Bestimmung gilt die Anmeldung, der Antrag oder die Beschwerde als nicht eingereicht. (4) Der in Absatz 2 genannte Vertreter wird in das europäische Patentregister eingetragen. Der eingetragene Vertreter, dessen Vertretungsmacht erloschen ist, wird weiter als Vertreter angesehen, solange er im Register eingetragen ist.

Page 161

Die Vertragsstaaten können alle Massnahmen ergreifen, um den Anmeldern oder Inhabern europäischer Patente und den Beteiligten im Verfahren zur Erklärung der Nichtigkeit endgültiger europäischer Patente für die Zahlung der Gebühren und anderen Kosten des Verfahrens mit Ausnahme der Anmeldegebühr und der Jahresgebühren das Armenrecht zu gewähren, soweit diese Personen wegen Bedürftigkeit zur Zahlung nicht in der Lage sind. Diese Massnahmen können nur zugunsten natürlicher Personen getroffen werden, die Staatsangehörige des betreffenden Vertragstaats sind oder ihren Wohnsitz im Gebiet dieses Vertragstaats haben.

Bemerkung

Die Mehrheit der Arbeitsgruppe hat sich für die erste Fassung ausgesprochen.

Artikel 170 Vollstreckung von festgesetzten Kosten und von Geldbussen (1) Die Entscheidungen des Europäischen Patentamts über die Festsetzung der Kosten des Verfahrens, über die Erhebung einer Geldbusse oder über die Feststellung der Nichtzahlung von Jahresgebühren im Sinne des Artikels 123 sind vollstreckbare Titel; dies gilt nicht gegenüber Staaten. (2) Die Zwangsvollstreckung erfolgt nach den Vorschriften des Zivilprozessrechts des Vertragstaats, in dessen Hoheitsgebiet sie stattfindet. Die Vollstreckungsklausel wird nach einer Prüfung, die sich lediglich auf die Eohtheit des Titels erstrecken darf, von der nationalen Behörde erteilt, welche die Regierung jedes Vertragstaats zu diesem Zweck bestimmt und dem Europäischen Patentamt benennt. (3) Sind diese Formvorschriften auf Antrag des die Vollstreckung betreibenden Beteiligten erfullt, so kann dieser die Zwangsvollstreckung nach nationalem Recht betreiben, indem er die zuständige Stelle unmittelbar anruft. (4) Die Zwangsvollstreckung kann nur durch eine Entscheidung des Europäischen Patentamts oder des Europäischen Patentgerichts ausgesetzt werden. Für die Prüfung der Ordnungsmässigkeit der Vollstreckungsmassnahmen sind jedoch die nationalen Rechtsprechungsorgane zuständig.

KAPITEL IV VERTRETUNG Artikel 171 Berufsmässiger Vertreter (1) Die Vertretung natürlicher und juristischer Personen in Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann nur durch natürliche Personen wahrgenommen werden, die in eine beim Europäischen Patentamt geführte Liste eingetragen sind. (2) In die Liste kann jede Person eingetragen werden, die ihren Geschäftssitz im Gebiet eines der Vertragstaaten hat und gemäss einer Bescheinigung der nationalen Zentralbehörde

Page 162

COIMITE DE COORDINATION EN MATIERE DE PROPRIETE INDUSTRIELLE INSTITUE PAR LES ETATS MEMBRES ET LA COMMISSION DE LA COMMUNAUTE ECONOMIQUE EUROPEENNE

KDINIEFUNGSAUSSCHUSSAUF DEM GEBIET GEKERBLICHEN RECHTSSCHUTZES EINI2T 1  A DEN MITGLIEDSTAATEN UND KOMMISSION DER EUROPÄISCHEN WIRTSCHAFTSGEMEINSCHAFT

COMITATO DI COORDINAMENTO IN MATERIA DI PROPRIETÀ INDUSTRIALE ISTITUITO DAGLI STATI MEMBRI E DALLA COMMISSIONE DELLA COMUNITÀ ECONOMICA EUROPEA

COORDINATIE-COMITE OP HET GEBIED VAN DE INDUSTRIELE EIGENDOM INGESTELD DOOR DE LID-STATEN EN DE COMMISSIE VAN DE EUROPESE ECONOMISCHE GEMEENSCHAP

AVANT-PROJET DE CONVENTION

relatif à un droit européen des brevets élaboré par le groupe de travail «brevets»

VORENTWURF EINES ABKOMMENS über ein europäisches Patentrecht ausgearbeitet von der Arbeitsgruppe „Patente"

SCHEMA DI CONVENZIONE sul diritto europeo dei brevetti predisposto dal Gruppo di lavoro «brevetti»

VOORONTWERP VERDRAG

betreffende een Europees octrooirecht opgesteld door de werkgroep "octrooien"

Page 163

professional patent agent before that office, may be entered in the list. Entry is effected upon request, accompanied by the certificate referred to above, which must specify the extent of such entitlement. (3) When, in a Contracting State, the qualification to act as an agent is not conditional upon the requirement of special professional qualifications, persons who act as agents before the central industrial property office of the said State must have habitually acted as such for at least five years. In such cases, the certificate specified in the preceding paragraph must indicate that the applicant satisfies this requirement. (4) Agents whose names are entered on the list referred to in paragraph (1) may only act before the European Patent Office to the extent that they are entitled, within the terms of the certificate referred to in paragraph (2), to act as patent agents in the Contracting State in which they exercise their profession. (5) Representation before the European Patent Office may be undertaken by any lawyer called to the Bar in one of the Contracting States, and having his professional office within such State, to the extent that he is able, within the said State, to act as a representative in patent matters.

Note: This Article may have to be modified to take account of new or aliended national provisions in the matter of representation before national industrial property offices.

Article 172. Compulsory representation

(1) Subject to the provisions of the following paragraphs, no person is compelled to be represented before the European Patent Office. (2) Natural and legal persons who have neither a place of business nor residence within the territory of one of the Contracting States must be represented in all proceedings before the European Patent Office by a patent agent. Upon conclusion of the proceedings, the authority of the patent agent to receive all communications concerning the patent, shall be legally maintained, unless the proprietor of the European patent has acquired an address for service within the territory of one of the Contracting States. (3) Applications for patents, requests and appeals by persons referred to in paragraph (2) can only be lodged through a patent agent. Failure to observe this requirement will result in the application for a patent, the request, or the appeal being deemed not to have been made. (4) The patent agent referred to in paragraph (2) will be entered in the European Register of Patents. Any agent so entered and who ceases to be authorised will continue to be regarded as the patent agent for such time as his name remains entered on the Register.

Article 173. Authorisations

(1) Patent agents acting as such before the European Patent Office must produce an authorisation in writing. (2) If several agents are authorised they may, notwithstanding any contrary provisions in the authorisation, act either jointly or individually. (3) Unless an authorisation contains provision to the contrary, it will not terminate upon the death of the person who issued it.

Page 164

(4) The competent authority of a Contracting State will only issue certificates to physical persons who are nationals of said State or ordinarily resident on its territory. (5) The fees and other expenses from which an applicant secures exemption will be reimbursed to the European Patent Office by the Contracting State whose competent authority issued the certificate. (6) Contracting States are not bound to issue the certificates provided for by this Article.

2nd Variant

Contracting States may take any measure designed to assist applicants for and proprietors of European patents and parties to proceedings for the revocation of final European Patents in respect of the payment of fees, other than application fee and renewal fees, and for the payment of other costs of proceedings, in so far as such persons are not in a position to pay them, owing to insufficient means. These measures can only be taken in favour of physical persons who are nationals of the State concerned, or ordinarily resident on its territory.

Note: The majority of the Working Party were in favour of the first variant.

Article 170. Enforcement of costs and fines

(1) Decisions of the European Patent Office taxing costs of proceedings, imposing a fine, or establishing failure to pay renewal fees within the meaning of Article 123, are themselves enforceable; this provision does not apply to States. (2) Enforcement shall be regulated by the rules of civil procedure in the Contracting State in whose territory the enforcement takes place. The enforcement order will be issued, without further requirement other than that of the authenticity of the document, by the national authority which the government of each of the Contracting States will designate for this purpose, and of which the European Patent Office shall be informed. (3) After the completion of these formalities at the request of the interested party, the latter may levy distraint by direct application to the competent authority in accordance with national law. (4) Enforcement can only be stayed by a decision of the European Patent Office or the European Patent Court. However, national courts shall be competent to investigate the validity of such enforcement measures.

Article 171. Professional Patent agents

(1) Representation of natural and legal persons in proceedings before the European Patent Office can only be undertaken by natural persons whose names appear in the list maintained for this purpose by the said Office. (2) Any person having his registered place of business within the territory of one of the Contracting States and who, according to a certificate furnished by the central industrial property office of one of such States, is entitled to act as a

Page 165

BOARD OF TRADE

Translation of a Draft Convention relating to a European Patent Law

LONDON HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE FIVE SHILLINGS NET

Page 166

Artikel 167 (216) Die Gruppe beschloss, beide Fassungen sowie auch die Bemerkung beizubehalten, wonach sich die Mehrheit für die erste Fassung ausgesprochen hat.

Artikel 168 (167) Der Artikel wurde angenommen. Er soll den Sachverständigen der Justizministerien zur Stellungnahme vorgelegt werden.

Artikel 169 (159) Der Vorsitzende erinnerte die Gruppe daran, dass diesem Artikel der Gedanke zugrunde liegt, dass hinsichtlich der Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt die gleiche Regelung gelten soll wie vor den nationalen Patentämtern. In der Praxis sei die Durchführung dieses Grundsatzes jedoch schwierig, sowohl wegen der Verschiedenartigkeit der Voraussetzungen, unter denen ein Vertreter in den einzelnen Ländern zugelassen werde, als auch wegen der Unterschiede zwischen dem Verfahren der einzelnen Länder und dem europäischen Verfahren. Dieses Problem könnte am zweckmässigsten im Koordinierungsausschuss besprochen werden, der insbesondere prüfen könnte, ob sich dieser Artikel nicht so vervollständigen lasse, dass es den einzelnen Staaten überlassen werde, die Zulassung zur Vertretung von natürlichen und juristischen Personen vor den nationalen Patentämtern zu regeln.

Herr Fressonnet hob hervor, dass die Frage der Vertretung auch auf nationaler Ebene Schwierigkeiten verursache. Die Rechtsanwälte sähen ihr Monop ^- der Interessenvertretung bedroht. Dadurch, dass fast immer Nichtigkeit geltend gemacht werde, verhinderten sie, dass Patentingenieure (ingénieurs-conseils) selbst vor Gericht aufträten. Er schlug daher vor, nur den ersten Absatz stehen zu lassen und die Aufstellung der Liste der vor dem Patentamt zugelassenen Vertreter einer späteren Regelung vorzubehalten. Die Absätze 2 bis 5 sollten dann nur als Richtlinie für diese Regelung gelten. Der Vorschlag wurde jedoch abgelehnt.

Der Vorsitzende und die Gruppe beschlossen einstimmig, die Bemerkung so zu fassen, dass sie nicht den. Vorbehalt einer Delegation enthält, sondern vielmehr einen allgemeinen Vorbehalt, der auf die Möglichkeit hinweist, diesen Artikel wegen der Entwicklung der einschlägigen nationalen Vorschriften ändern zu müssen.

Page 167

ARBEITSGRUPPE " Patente "

Brüssel, den 31. Juli 1962 Vertraulich

Ergebnisse der sechsten Sitzung der Arbeitsgruppe "Patente" vom 13. bis 23. Juni 1962 in Munchen

Zu Artikel 169

gemäß der in Absatz 2 vorgesehenen Bescheinigung die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts in dem Vertragsstaat wahrnehmen können, in dem sie ihre Tätigkeit ausüben. (5) Die Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann darüber hinaus von jedem Rechtsanwalt, der in einem der Mitgliedastaaten zugelassen ist und seinen Geschäftssitz in diesem Staat hat, in dem Umfang wahrgenommen werden, in dem er in diesem Staat die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts aus( üben kann.

Bemerkung:

Eine Delegation hat sich ihre Stellungnahme zu den Absätzen 2 bis 5 vorbehalten.

Page 169

Kapitel IV

Vertretung

Artikel 169 (159) Berufsmäßiger. Vertreter (1) Die Vertretung natürlicher und juristischer Personen in Verfahren vor dem Europaischen Patentamt kann nur durch natürliche Personen wahrgenommen werden, die in eine beim Europäischen Patentamt geführte Liste eingetragen sind. (2) In die Liste kann jede Person eingetragen werden, die ihren Geschäftssitz im Gebiet eines der Vertragsstaaten hat und gemäß einer Bescheinigung der nationalen Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz eines der Vertragsstaaten befugt ist, die berufsmäßige Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor dieser Behörde auszuüben. Die Eintragung erfolgt auf Grund eines Antrags, dem die oben genannte Bescheinigung beizufügen ist, aus der sich der Umfang der Vertretungsbefugnis ergeben muß. (3) Unterliegt in einem Vertragsstaat die Vertretungsbefugnis nicht dem Erfordernis einer besonderen beruflichen Befähigung, so müssen die Antragsteller, die die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz dieses Staates wahrnehmen, diese Vertretung mindestens fünf Jahre lang regelmäßig ausgeübt haben. In einem solchen Fall muß sich aus der im vorhergehenden Absatz genannten Bescheinigung ergeben, daß der Antragsteller diesem Erfordernis entspricht. (4) Die Vertreter, die in die in Absatz 1 vorgesehene Liste eingetragen sind, dürfen vor dem Europäischen Patentamt die Vertretung nur in dem Umfang wahrnehmen, in dem sie

Page 170

Arbeitsgruppe "Patente" Redaktionsausschuss

Brüssel, den 26. Mai 1962

STRENG VERTRAULICH

Vor eht w u f f eines Abkommens uber ein europäisches Patentrecht

Page 171

Artikel 157 wird angenommen.

Artikel 159 Die französische Delegation ist damit einverstanden, diesen Artikel im Abkommen selbst zu belassen. Auf ihren Antrag soll in einer Anmerkung darauf hingewiesen werden, daß Abs. 1 einstimmig angenommen worden sei, und daß die französische Delegation zu den Absätzen 2 - 5 noch nicht ihre Zustimmung geben könne.

Artikel 160 Der Redaktionsausschuß wird mit der Prüfung dieser Bestimmungen beauftragt, um die Beratung durch die Arbeitsgruppe in der nächsten Sitzung in München vorzubereiten.

Die Artikel 161, 162, 164 werden angenommen. Artikel 165 ist schon von der Arbeitsgruppe zu Beginn der Sitzung gestrichen worden.

Artikel 166 wird angenommen.

Artikel 191 Die Klammern können wegfallen, und die Anmerkung soll dahin geändert werden, daß die Vorschrift den Justizministern zur Prüfung vorgelegt werden müsse.

Artikel 192 Der Redaktionsausschuß hat zu diesem Artikel schon Stellung genommen. Die Stellungnahme soll in der nächsten Sitzung der Arbeitsgruppe erörtert werden.

Artikel 193 wird angenommen.

Artikel 211 Die Anmerkung wird beibehalten. Artikel 221 wird angenommen. Artikel 241 Um auf den Vorbehalt der französischen Delegation Rücksicht zu nehmen,

Page 172

ARBEITSGRUPPE "Patente"

Zweiter Teil : SITEUNGSBERICHTE

Arbeitsentwurf eines Abkommens über ein europäisches Patentrecht

Page 173

ARBEITSGRUPPE " Patente "

Brüssel, den 22. Mai 1962 VERTRAULICH

Ergebnisse der funften Sitzung der Arbeitsgruppe "Patente" vom 2. bis 18. April 1962 in Brüssel

3076/IV/62-D Orig.: F

Artikel 159
Berufsmässiger Vortrotur

(1) Die Vertretung natürlicher und juristischer Personen in Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt kann nur durch natürliche Personen wahrgenommen werden, die in oine beim Europäischen Patentamt geführte Liste eingetragen sind. (2) In die Liste kann jede Porson eingetragen werden, die ihren Geschäftssitz im Gebiet eines der Vertragsstaaten hat und gemäss einer Boscheinigung der nationalen Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz oines der Vertragsstaaten befugt ist, die borufsmässige Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor dieser Behörde auszuüben. Die Eintragung erfolgt auf Grund oines Antrags, dem die oben genannte Bescheinigung beizufügen ist, aus der sich der Umfang der Vertretungsbefugnis ergeben muss. (3) Unterliegt in oinom Vortragsstaat die Vertretungsbefugnis nicht dem Erfordernis einer besonderen beruflichen Befähigung, so müssen die Antragsteller, die die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patentrechts vor der Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz dieses Staates wahrnohmen, diese Vortrotung mindestens [fünf] Jahre lang regelmässig ausgeübt haben. In einem solchen Fall muss sich aus der im vorhergehenden Absatz genannten Boscheinigung ergeben, dass der Antragsteller diesem Erfordernis entspricht. (4) Die Vortreter, die in dio in Absatz 1 vorgesehene Listo eingetragen sind, dürfen vor dem Europäischon Patentamt die Vortretung nur in dem Umfang wahrnehmen, ibr dem sie gemäss der in dabsatsaprtrergé-ats vorgesehenen Boscheinigung die Vortrotung auf dem Gebiot des Patontrechts in dem Vortragsstaat wahrnchmen können, in dem sie ihre Tätigkeit ausüben. (5) Die Vortretung vor dem Europäischon Patentamt kann darüber hinaus von jedem Rechtsanwalt, wder, inceinemwderckitgliudatasten zugelaseen katcundaseinenußeschäftssatzcin dasses staatäBstpin dencunfangswahtgenommun werden, in dem or in diesem Staat die Vertretung auf dem Gebiet des Patontrechts ausüben kann.

Bemerkung :

Eine Delegation war nicht in der Lage, ihre Zustimmung zu Absatz 1 dioses Artikels zu geben.

Page 175

ARDEITSGRUPPE "Patente"

Erster Teil : TEXTENTWURFE

Arbeitsentwurf eines Abkommens über ein curopäisches Patentrecht

Page 176

ARBEITSGRUPPE " Patente "

Brüssel, den 1. Februar 1962 VERTRAULICH

Ergebnisse der vierten Sitzung der Arbeitsgruppe "Patente" vom 8. bis 19. Januar 1962 in Brüssel

Page 177

Personen vertreten könnten, die ihren Wohnsitz in Deutschland haben würden.

Auf eine Bemerkung von Herrn van Benthem und auf eine andere von Herrn Pfanner wird beschlossen, daß alle Disziplinarbestimmungen für die Vertreter sowie die zum Beispiel für die Mandatsniederlegung. und den Todesfall geltenden Vorschriften in der Ausführungsordnung berücksichtigt werden sollen.

Artikel 159 wird an den Redaktionsausschuß überwiesen. Hinsichtlich der Anwälte wird die Gruppe bei den Erörterungen zu Artikel 160 auf Artikel 165 zurückkommen und den Redaktionsausschuß be. auftragen; für diese einen neuen Absatz auszuarbeiten. Über diese Erörterungen wird dieses Protokoll später berichten.

Erörterungen zu Artikel 160 des Vorentwurfs

Der Präsident erklärt, nach diesem Artikel müßten sich alle, die nicht.im Gebiet eines der sechs Staaten ansässig seien, vor dem Eurcjäischen Patentamt vertreten lassen. Darüber hinaus sei dieser Artikel nich davon abhängig, daß der Grundsatz der offenen Tür angenommen werde. Er gelte nämlich auch für die außerhalb dieser Länder ansässigen Angehöriger der Vertragsstaaten.

Das Problem der notwendigen Vertretung kann auf zwei Arten gelöst werden. Entweder kann die Vertretung für alle Rechtshandlungen vorge-schrieben werden oder aber nur für die Prozeßhandlungen und nicht für die Entgegennahme der Zustellungen durch das Patentamt. In seinem Vorentwurf hat der Präsident die einschneidenste Lösung gewählt, nämlich die welche die uneingeschränkte Mitwirkung eines notwendigen Vertreters vorschreibt.

Die Gruppe erörtert zunächst eine Frage von Herrn De Muyser, ob der außerhalb der Vertragsstaaten ansässige Erfinder die Anmeldung nicht durc die Post bewirken könne, selbst wenn er dann für das weitere Verfahren einen notwendigen Vertreter bestellen müsse.

Page 178

ARBEITSGRUPPE "Patente"

Sitzungsperiode vom 8. bis 19. Januar 1962 Bericht über die Sitzung vom 11. Januar 1962

Erörterungen zu Artikel 159 des Vorentwurfs (Fortsetzung)

Der Präsident eröffnet die Sitzung um 9.30 und faßt die gestrigen Beschlüsse über die berufsmäßigen Vertreter zusammen. Zunächst sollen beim Europäischon Patentamt nur die Vertreter zugelassen wurden, die auch bei den nationalen Ämtern zugelassen sind. Diese Zulassung werde durch die nationalen Behörden bescheinigt. Darüber hinaus sei die Vertretungsbefugnis von der Eintragung in eine beim Europäischon Patentamt geführte Liste abhängig. Schließlich müsse Artikel 159 eine Bestimmung für die Länder enthalten, die keine Regelung für die berufsmäßige Vertretung auf diesem Gebiete kennen. Nach dieser Bestimmung dürften nur die berufsmäßigen Vertreter zugelassen werden, die diesen Beruf nachweislich bei einem nationalen Patentamt während einer bestimmten Zahl von Jahren ausgeübt haben.

Man erörtert die Frage, wieviel Jahre hierfür erforderlich sein sollen. Es wird beschlossen, vorläufig eine Frist von fünf Jahren festzuhalten. Diese Zchl soll in Klammern gesetzt werden, damit sich die Delegationen mit den interessierten Kreisen beraten und in der nächsten Sitzung endgültig Stellung nehmen können.

Der Präsident weist darauf hin, daß Absatz 2, der für die Vertretung auf nationaler und europäischer Ebene den gleichen Umfang vorsehe, ein deutsches Problem berücksichtige; in Deutschland könnten nämlich einige Personen jeden Beliebigen vertreten. während andere nur solche

Page 179

Der Vorschlag von Herrn de Muyser wird unter Vorbehalt einer neuen Erörterung angenommen.

Die Gruppe weist jedoch den Gedanken zurück, die Forderung vorzusehen, den Beruf "à bureau ouvert" ausgeübt zu haben, ebenso wie die Unterscheidung zwischen Akademikern (universitaires) und Nichtakademikern (non-universitaires).

Die Sitzung wurde um 18.15 Uhr geschlossen.

Page 180

auftreten, auch vor dem Europäischen Amt auftreten können. Darüber hinaus können die vor dem Europäischen Amt als berufsmäßige Vertreter zugelassenen Personen auch als notwendige Vertreter für Staatsangehörige dritter Länder ernannt werden. In diesem Falle ist es unabdingbar, daß sie einen Wohnsitz in den Mitgliedstaaten haben, der als Zustellungsadresse dienen kann.

Die Gruppe ist sich darüber einig, in Artikel 158 nur die Bedingung des Geschäftssitzes in einem der Mitgliedstaaten des europäischen Abkommens zu verlangen. Die Alternative des persönlichen Wohnsitzes wird gestrichen. Die Erörterung von Artikel 158 wird vorläufig beendet.

Erörterung von Artikel 159 des Arbeitsentwurfs

Der Präsident führt aus, daß dieser Artikel von dem Gedanken ausgeht, daß jede Person, welche autorisiert ist, die Vertretung vor den nationalen Ämtern berufsmäßig auszuüben, dies gleichfalls vor dem Europäischen Amt unter der Bedingung tun könne, daß sie ihren Geschäftssitz in einem der Vertragsstaaten hat. Um auf der Liste des Europäischen Amtes als berufsmäßiger Vertreter eingeschrieben zu werden, werde eine Bescheinigung der nationalen Verwaltung verlangt.

Der Präsident unterbreitet zur Beurteilung durch die Gruppe den Vorschlag von Herrn de Muyser, darüber hinaus eine Bescheinigung der nationalen Verwaltung zu verlangen, welche die Tatsache bestätigt, daß der Interessierte den Beruf des Vertreters während einer gewissen Zeit ausgeübt hat. Diese zusätzliche Bedingang könne nur für die Vertreter gelten, welche aus Ländern kommen, die zu diesem Punkte noch keine Berufsregelung besitzen.

ARBEITSGRUPPE

"Patente"

Zweiter Teil : SITZUNGSBERICHTE

Arbeitsentwurf eines Abkommens über ein europäisches Patentrecht

Page 182

ARBEITSGRUPPE " Patente "

Brüssel, den 1. Februar 1962 VERTRAULICH

Ergebnisse der vierten Sitzung der Arbeitsgruppe "Patente" vom 8. bis 19. Januar 1962 in Brüssel

Page 183

rufsmäßigen Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt zugelassen würde. Man könnte erwägen, zusätzlich zu den in Artikel 159 genannten Voraussetzungen noch eine besondere fachliche Befähigung zu verlangen. Als fachliche Befähigung könnte dabei ein abgeschlossenes juristisches, naturwissenschaftliches, technisches oder landwirtschaftliches Hochschulstudium oder aber auch eine abgeschlossene Ausbildung an einer höheren technischen Lehranstalt angesehen werden. Es würde wohl schwierig sein, einheitliche Maßstäbe für die Zulassung zu gewinnen. Daher dürfte es sich empfehlen, zunächst von einer derartigen zusätzlichen Voraussetzung abzusehen und dies der eingangs erwähnten späteren Regelung im Wege der Harmonisierung der nationalen Vorschriften oder der Schaffung eines europäischen Rechts für Vertreter vor dem Europäischen Patentamt zu überlassen.

Page 184

Die in Artikel 159 vorgeschlagene Lösung der Frage der berufsmäßigen Vertretung ist berufsrechtlich gesehen sehr frei, denn sie beschränkt sich darauf, den bestehenden Zustand in den Vertragsstaaten auf die europäische Ebene zu projizieren, ohne dabei irgendeine weitergehende Einschränkung anzuordnen. Nach dieser Lösung hätten die Mandanten auf der europäischen Ebene die Möglichkeit, frei unter den berufsmäßigen Vertretern aus allen Staaten zu wählen. Man könnte erwägen; ob man nicht für eine Übergangszeit vorsehen sollte, daß ein berufsmäßiger Vertreter einen Patentanmelder mit Sitz oder Wohnsitz in einem der Vertragsstaaten nur dann vor dem Europäischen Patentamt vertreten darf, wenn er diesen Patentanmelder auch vor der nationalen Behörde des Vertragsstaats vertreten darf, in dem der Patentanmelder seinen Sitz oder Wohnsitz hat. Dies wäre sozusagen ein System der "geschlossenen Länder", da z.B. ein Patentanmelder mit Wohnsitz in Deutschland nur durch einen deutschen Patentanwalt, ein Patentanmelder mit Wohnsitz in Frankreich nur durch einen französischen ingénieur conseil vertreten werden könnte. Patentanmelder mit Sitz oder Wohnsitz außerhalb des Gebiets der Vertragsstaaten könnten allerdings auch bei dieser Lösung durch jeden beim Europäischen Patentamt zugelassenen berufsmäßigen Vertreter vertreten werden. Dieser Lösung kann entgegengehalten werden, daß sie mit der Zielsetzung der Freiheit des Dienstleistungsverkehrs innerhalb des Gemeinsamen Marktes, wie sie in Artikel 59 ff des EWGVertrags niedergelegt ist, nicht völlig übereinstimmt. Diese Lösung sollte deshalb nur für eine Übergangszeit in Erwägung gezogen werden.

Die in Artikel 159 vorgeschlagene Lösung könnte vielleicht deswegen als unbefriedigend angesehen werden, weil bei ihr ein zu großer und für das neuartige europäische Verfahren zu wenig qualifizierter Personenkreis zur be-

Page 185

zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt, d.h. erst nach dem Inkrafttreten des Abkommens über ein europäisches Patentrecht geprüft werden. Denkbar wäre auch, daß zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt eine Harmonisierung der entsprechenden nationalen Vorschriften erwogen wird.

In Artikel 159 wird auf Grund dieser Uberlegungen vorgeschlagen, beim Europäischen Patentamt diejenigen Personen zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung zuzulassen, die die Voraussetzungen des Artikels 158 erfüllen und zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung vor einem der nationalen Patentämter der Vertragsstaaten befugt sind. Absatz 2 präzisiert, daß eine Befugnis zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung, die vor der zuständigen nationalen Behörde nur in einem beschränkten Umfang besteht, auch vor dem Europäischen Patentamt in derselben Weise beschränkt bleibt. Man könnte vielleicht noch zusätzlich verlangen; daß die bei dem Europäischen Patentamt zugelassenen berufsmäßigen Vertreter ihren Beruf bereits vorher eine gewisse Zeit lang vor dem zuständigen nationalen Patentamt ausgeübt haben müssen.

Aus verwaltungstechnischen Gründen wird vorgeschlagen, daß die Befugnis zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung durch die Eintragung in eine Liste konstitutiv herbeigeführt wird. Dadurch soll die Arbeit des Europäischen Patentamts erleichtert und der Offentlichkeit eine sichere Unterrichtung ermöglicht werden. Von der Prüfung, ob und in welchem Umfang eine Person vor der zuständigen nationalen Behörde zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung befugt ist, soll das Europäische Patentamt befreit bleiben. Daher wird vorgeschlagen, daß diese Zulassungsvoraussetzungen durch eine Bescheinigung der betreffenden nationalen Behörde nachzuweisen ist.

Page 186

Zu Artikel 159 Berufsmäßiger Vertreter

2. Bemerkungen:

Artikel 159 regelt die Frage, welche Personen berufsmäßig zur Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt zugelassen sind. Unter einer berufsmäßigen Vertretung ist eine Vertretung zu verstehen, die in wiederholten Fällen gegen Entgelt übernommen wird. Es handelt sich hier also um das Recht der Patentanwälte, Rechtsanwälte und der sonstigen beruflichen Vertreter. Da diese Materie in den Vertragsstaaten sehr unterschiedlich geregelt ist und eine Rechtsangleichung auf diesem Gebiet im Augenblick wohl nicht erreicht werden kann, erschien es ratsam, von einer eigenen "europäischen Lösung" in dem Abkommen über ein europäisches Patentrecht Abstand zu nehmen. Trotzdem mußte hier eine vorläufige Regelung gefunden werden, da eine völlig freie Zulassung jeder beliebigen Person zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt wohl nicht in Betracht kommen kann, weil das Europäische Patentamt dann mit einem unübersehbaren Kreis weitgehend unqualifizierter Vertreter arbeiten müßte. Es erschien daher ratsam, sich im Augenblick darauf zu beschränken, den im nationalen Recht bestehenden Zustand auf die europäische Ebene zu projizieren. Dies ist der Grundgedanke, von dem der Vorschlag zu Artikel 159 ausgeht. Diejenigen Personenkreise, die derzeit zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung vor einem nationalen Patentamt befugt sind, sollen in gleichem Umfang auch zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung vor dem Europäischen Patentamt befugt sein. - Falls es für erforderlich gehalten wird, die Voraussetzungen für den Kreis der berufsmäßigen Vertreter vor dem Europäischen Patentamt durch eine europäische Regelung festzulegen, sollte eine solche Regelung

KURT HAertel

Bonn, den 15. November 1961

VERTRAULICH !

B e m e r k u n g e n zu dem ersten Arbeitsentwurf eines Abkommens über ein europäisches Patentrecht

Artikel 151 bis 170 [^Artikel 151 bis 166

Artikel 159

Berufsmäßiger Vertreter (1) Zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung natürlicher und juristischer Personen in einem in diesem Abkommen oder in der Ausführungsordnung zu diesem Abkommen geregelten Verfahren vor dem Europäischen Patentamt ist zugelassen, wer in eine beim Europäischen Patentamt geführte Liste eingetragen ist. In diese Liste wird auf Antrag eingetragen, wer die Voraussetzungen des Artikels 158 erfüllt und zur berufsmäßigen Vertretung vor der nationalen Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz eines Vertragsstaats befugt ist. Mit dem Antrag ist eine Bescheinigung der genannten Behörde vorzulegen, aus der sich der Umfang der Vertretungsbefugnis ergibt. (2) Der eingetragene Vertreter darf natürliche und juristische Personen vor dem Europäischen Patentamt nur in dem Umfang vertreten, in dem er diese Personen gemäß der nach Absatz 1 vorgelegten Bescheinigung vor der nationalen Zentralbehörde für den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz vertreten darf.

VERTRAULICH!

Erster Arbeitsentwurf
eines Abkommens
über ein europäisches Patentrecht
Artikel 151 bis 170
Artikel 151 bis 1667

Page 190

Art. 134 MPO

- 2 -

Entwurf, der dem nebenstehenden Dokument zugrundeliegt	Art. Nr. im Entwurf/ Dokument	Dokument in dem der Art. behandelt wird	Fundstelle im Dokument
	134	M/23	S. 280-292; 296
		M/47/I/II/III	S. 20
		M/48/I	S. 1 Memorandum A
		M/53/I/II	S. N 3
		M/62/I/II	S. N 3
		M/112/I	S. 1+2
		M/115/I	S. 1
		M/122/I	S. 1
		M/125/I	S. 1
		M/126/I/R 9	S. 3+4
		M/136/I/R 10	S. 13+14
		M/141/I/R 12	S. 3+4
		M/146/R 5	กit. 134
		M/160/K	S. 2

Page 191

Article 90 Only concerns German text

Article 93 (1) ... It shall be published simultaneously with the publication of the specification of the European patent when the grant of the patent has become effective before the expiry of the period referred to above.

Article 102
Only concerns German text

Article 116 Only concerns German text

Article 117 Only concerns German text

Article 124 Only concerns German text

Article 133 Only concerns German text

Article 134 Only concerns German text

Article 143 Only concerns German text