Thursday, July 09, 2026 EQE-results – Do’s and don’ts for filing an appeal

With the results of the EQE expected to come out soon (or maybe they are already out when you read this), we of course hope that you passed all the papers you sat with flying colours. However, if it turns out you have not been not successful in a paper, maybe you are wondering whether it is worthwhile for you to file an appeal against the decision of the Examination Board.

 

The answer to this question is definitely not always “yes”. And also not “you can always try”.

 

Below you’ll find some guidance with respect to appeals. Please note that while we are open to any specific questions that you may have, we will not advise on the merits of your arguments.

 

1. Procedure

The appeal procedure is governed by Art. 24 REE. You have to file a notice of appeal including the statement of the grounds within one month of the date of notification of the decision of the Examination Board. You have to pay an appeal fee (which is 600% of the basic fee for sitting a paper).

 

The appeal is then reviewed by the Examination Board. If they consider the appeal admissible and well-founded, they will grant interlocutory revision. The decision is then rectified and the appeal fee reimbursed. If interlocutory revision is not granted, the appeal is remitted to the Disciplinary Board of Appeal of the EPO. Oral proceedings may be part of the procedure before the Disciplinary Board of Appeal.

 

2. Core argumentation - Do & Don’t

Whether your appeal has a chance of being successful or not depends largely on the question whether you can objectively make plausible that the answer you have written should have been awarded more marks than you received.

 

For example, you interpreted prior art D1 such that it does not disclose feature A, while from the possible solution in the Examiners’ Report it appears that this feature A was considered to be disclosed in D1. This led you to a different conclusion with respect to the novelty of claim 1, which has cost you marks. In that case, your appeal may be successful if you can for example point to a specific phrase in the paper that plausibly can lead to the conclusion that this feature A was indeed not disclosed in D1. That explanation, based on what is objectively in the paper in combination with the line of reasoning that you have written in your answer, may serve as a proper basis for a well-founded appeal.

 

On the other hand, arguing that the possible solution in the Examiners’ Report is wrong, that the marking scheme or the paper was not fair or that the Exam Committee didn’t do their job properly  is not very likely to be successful.

 

In addition, do not make any assumptions about what happened during the marking process or what the thoughts of the markers were when marking your paper. You simply do not know. The possible solution in the Examiner’s Report is generally not the only solution that was awarded marks and the marking process is carefully designed to be fair and uniform. Of course, mistakes do happen, but unfounded accusations of creative interpretations or even ill will on the side of the markers does not bring your case forward.

 

Another point to consider is the length of your grounds of appeal. Just like in an appeal case before a Technical Board of Appeal, you want to bring across your arguments in a clear and understandable manner. This requires structured and concise arguments, focussed on the main issues that you want to discuss. Longwinded arguments and extensively commenting on each individual minor point will rather blur the picture than help you to get your point across.

 

In my experience, the Examination Board is truly open to listening to your arguments if you focus on the merits of your answer in relation to the contents of the paper. But don’t treat them as if they were “the enemy” that tried to trip you up with a deliberately ambiguous paper.

 

3. Tone of voice – Do & Don’t

Of course, everybody understands the feelings of disappointment that come with failing an EQE paper. However, do not forget that the EQE tests whether you are fit to practice. The stress, pressure and personal involvement of doing the EQE are actually not that different from doing for example a high-profile case before a Technical Board of Appeal. In such a Technical Board of Appeal case, proper professional behaviour is expected of any European patent attorney, focussing on the merits of the case instead of on any personal feelings that the involved attorney may have. Showing that you can maintain proper professional standards in a stressful situation such as an appeal contributes to showing that you are fit to practice.

 

Being fit to practice is not the same as coming up with far-fetched interpretations or arguments or being aggressive (or passive-aggressive), rude or indignant towards the Examination Board or the Disciplinary Board of Appeal. Rather to the contrary.

 

You should keep in mind that the members of the Examination Board and the Disciplinary Board of Appeal are EPO staff and European patent attorneys (i.e., epi-members). According to Art. 1(e) of the Code of Conduct of the epi, good fellowship among epi-members is a necessity for preserving the reputation of the profession and should be exercised irrespective of personal feelings. Art. 6 of the Code of Conduct of the epi requires that an epi-member acts courteously in all dealings with the EPO. Of course, EQE candidates are not epi-members yet, but acting out of line with the Code of Conduct of the epi – which is part of the syllabus of the main exam papers of the new EQE – is not exactly a sign of being fit to practice.

 

So, keep your appeal polite, to the point and focussed on the merits of your answer. Wear that poker face, it will serve your case well.

 

4. Practical considerations

If no interlocutory revision is granted, an appeal often becomes a lengthy and intense procedure. The stress and uncertainty that come with it can be a real burden for candidates and the people around them.

 

From years of being in touch with EQE-candidates, it’s my impression that roughly about half of the appeal cases results in interlocutory revision. The other half of the appeals gets remitted to the Disciplinary Board of Appeal. The appeals that are dealt with by the Disciplinary Board of Appeals seem to have quite a low success rate.

 

If you are thinking about whether to file an appeal or not, it is wise to keep this in consideration. What are you better off with – a stressful and time-consuming procedure with an uncertain outcome, or instead spending that time and energy on preparing for a second go at the paper?

 

5. General advice

The above is not to say that you shouldn’t file an appeal. If you have a good case on the merits, with a serious and substantive argumentation to underpin it, go for it. However, on the other hand, it is not wise to waste time, energy and money on “fishing for points” and arguments dripping with – real or feigned – moral outrage.

 

If you decide to file an appeal, please focus on the merits of your answer in view of the paper, and keep a courteous and professional attitude in your words and actions towards everyone who is involved.