2026 EPO Guidelines: New Procedural Developments

This year’s modified EPC Guidelines entered into force last month, and in the latest in our series of articles, we look at updates to a handful of procedural developments at the core of European patent practice. For earlier articles in this series, see: 

• 2026 EPO Guidelines: What’s new for Novelty and Prior Art
• 2026 EPO Guidelines: Applying G1/24
• 2026 EPO Guidelines: How the EPO is approaching AI in practice

 No more PACE search requests – GL 2026, E-VIII, 4

Speeding swiftly to a noteworthy update, this evolution of the Guidelines sees an end to a familiar mechanism intended for accelerating the search procedure, with PACE search requests being abolished. 

This is a hallmark of the built-in timeliness of the European Patent Office in issuing search reports (as reported in their Official Journal 2025, A69), effectively rendering PACE search requests obsolete. PACE examination requests remain available, once the application has entered the examination stage.

Amendments in examination – GL 2026, H-II, 2.3

Amendments made to European patent applications must be admissible if they are to be entered into proceedings, and this is an upstream, separate consideration from allowability. The Examining Division have always had discretion to refuse to admit any amendments made after early stages of prosecution. The updated Guidelines now make clear that when determining the admissibility of a voluntary amendment proposed by an applicant during examination, a prima facie assessment of compliance with the European Patent Convention can be carried out, influencing the Examining Division’s discretion.

Where a negative outcome emerges from such an admissibility assessment, the reasons why an amended set of claims is prima facie not allowable must be given, promoting transparency. Interestingly, a need for extensive reasoning to attempt to demonstrate a lack of allowability actually indicates that an amendment should instead be admitted, which could help applicants successfully enter and potentially proceed with the amendments they want. The updated Guidelines explain:

“extensive reasoning is incompatible with a prima facie assessment.” 

Amendments in opposition – GL 2026, E-VI, 2.2.1

During opposition proceedings, requests for amendment may be disregarded if filed after the date fixed in the summons for making written submissions in preparation for oral proceedings. Now, the Guidelines elucidate that before deciding against admitting a further auxiliary amendment request, the Opposition Division must first review the content of the request. This admissibility review includes not only an assessment as to whether the amendments are a fair attempt to overcome the objections faced, but also an assessment as to whether the request is prima facie allowable. This detailed review step should help safeguard the patentee’s right to amend in opposition, as well as the public interest in avoiding abuse of procedure. 

If procedural abuse is suspected, such as where successive amendments are attempted but are unsuccessful, the chance to make any further amendment may be lost. Acting according to the European Patent Office’s principle of expediency of procedure should help avert this eventuality, such as by presenting a group of requests simultaneously.