The European Patent Convention provides that certain disclosures may be excused as novelty bars in respect of applications filed after the publication occurs. Thus prior disclosure as a result of an evident abuse of the applicant's rights or at certain international exhibitions does not constitute a novelty bar as long as an application is filed within a six-month grace period following one of these events. A question arises, however, whether the actual European application must be filed within six months of the unauthorized disclosure or whether it suffices if the European application claims priority from an application filed elsewhere within six months of that disclosure. The issue came before the Dutch Supreme Court in Organon International BV v. Applied Research Systems ARS Holding BV.

In this case, the court held that as long as the application from which priority was claimed was filed within six months of a disclosure which constituted an evident abuse of the applicant's rights, such disclosure would not be prejudicial to the novelty of the patent. To hold otherwise, even though the statute referred to the filing of the application having to take place within the six-month time period would mean that the excusal provision would fail to serve its purpose, namely, protection for the applicant.