This relates to Art. 138 (1)(b) EPC (European Patent Convention) which states:
(1)Subject to Article 139, a European patent may be revoked with effect for a Contracting State only on the grounds that:
(...)
(b)the European patent does not disclose the invention in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for it to be carried out by a person skilled in the art;
The Nobel laureates’ lawyers say the decision is so wrong and unfair that they have no choice but to preemptively cancel their patents, a scorched-earth tactic whose aim is to prevent the unfavorable legal finding from being recorded as the reason.
This makes no sense. The opinion (not yet "decision" - in any case before the EPO appeal boards, the board will issue a preliminary opinion based on the filings and arguments previously presented by both sides. A decision is only made after the oral proceeding.) is known and accessible by anyone. They cannot at this time refile with amendments to the claims or specification. And no patent attorney will whine "this is wrong and unfair so we will cancel the patent." That's a toddler's tantrum. If wrong, and the decision is handed down, they will appeal to the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO, and given the significance of the case it would likely be heard.
It sounds like a bunch of commotion to ultimately corral the rights into the hands of the stooges of the people that really hold the power. I could say Klaus Schwab just to make the point, but of course it would be poetic license.