Extraordinary news were published on the Kluwer patent blog yesterday:
"Landgericht München: Patrick Corcoran is Innocent and Acquitted of all Charges":
http://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2018/06/20/landgericht-munchen-patrick-corcoran-innocent-acquitted-charges
In summary, President Battistelli and Vice-President Topić sued Mr. Corcoran for libel in front of a German court. Mr. Bausch managed to have access to the original decision (which is linked in original and in English translation) and the decision says:
"The Landgericht thoroughly destroyed the complaint, designating plaintiffs' evidence as „assumptions" or „suspicions" far away from the high probability or near certainty necessary for entering a judgment against the defendant, and held that there is no basis for the accusations (a) that Mr. Corcoran wrote a certain allegedly defamatory email about Mr. Topić, (b) that he sent this email out, (c) that it was received by any of the alleged addressees, and (d) that the email was even defamatory to the Plaintiffs. I would call this decision a first class acquittal."
Märpel notes a little fact that was apparently forgotten in Mr. Bausch report. There was a good reason for the civil action: because a civil action was running, the Administrative Council could not reinstate Mr. Corcoran. As comments on the Kluwer patent blog point out: "The rotting fish stinks from the head."
Märpel also notes that AT-ILO made no mention of the facts listed by the Landgericht in their own decision. They didn't even mention that the EPO investigation unit themselves found that they could not assign the libel email found on the USB stick to Mr. Corcoran. Certainly, AT-ILO were informed of that report by the EPO investigation unit, yet they chose to do nothing. Mr. Petrović, your actions speak louder than words. AT-ILO prejudice is now clear.
But the court in Karlruhe is likely to notice Mr. Petrović actions. Are they going to be satisfied with a court which ignores the basic principles of justice, ignores the facts concerning Mr.Corcoran or is satisfied that President Battistelli can harass and dismiss staff representatives? The next public reading in Geneva is next week and will be just as scandalous. Quo usque tandem?
7 comments:
Mr. Petrović ?
You do mean Topíc, don't you?
And any idea who was the other plaintiff?
I think that Märpel means that ILO did not even consider the decision of the Landgericht in their later decision, therefore Petrović. The decision of the Landgericht was published on 6.11.2017, so ILO knew and chose to ignore it.
The two plaintiffs, according to Thorsten Bausch, are Battistelli and Topić.
Unfortunately, ILO-AT does not ignore for the first time the decisions of a national court in connection with EPO cases. In another famous case, two Dutch high criminal court decisions were blatantly ignored and ridiculed by both, the EPO AND ILO-AT. The question to ask is, would ILO-AT and EPO have acted the same way in the case of a guilty verdict? Let me guess
It is easy to guess, I think it is clear to everyone that ILO is little more than a kangaroo court. I hope that Märpel is right and that Karlsruhe will notice that there is no judicial independence and stall the UPC until reforms are decided.
Do you have a link to that Dutch case or at least know the year of the decision?
thank you Marpel for these posts. the information that is provided internally by EPO is always "all is well, quality is excellent" etc
We work in a sort of parallel world where innocent people are the bad ones, who deserve their fate of punishments such as no career progression, demoting, warning letters, threats or eviction. Truth is what the management says today, which can be the opposite of what was said the day before. Example : we are asked at the moment to be "green in June" - no environment consideration of course, they mean that the production has to reach 50% of the yearly target end of June. Measures such as forbidding to take holidays, to do other tasks or to attend courses are taken. Guess what will happen on 1st July? We will be told we are late for this or that objective and need to concentrate on all these tasks that were laid down in May and June... That is not management, that is just pleasing Battistelli who want to leave with a big fat bonus. So much for the applicants,the public and investing in the short term and longer term future of the EPO. We do produce more but all the tasks that are needed and which are time consuming are not done since about 5 years now. We stop industry visits, reorganisation in classification, training. Coaches for newcomers are more and more selected among the highly productive colleagues, those that cut many corners ; newcomers in a few years' time will be on their own with little knowledge. at the moment examiners don't have time to examine but at some point, the majority of examiners will not be able to properly examine. EPO will then be dead.
Indeed Zorro is right, Mr Petrovic is to blame for the AT-ILO decision...
Post a Comment