DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002703918-0002

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2019-11-21

R0113/2019-3

Contested design: 002703918-0002

CDRAppellant: holder

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed; the design holder is ordered to bear the invalidity applicant's costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs incurred by the invalidity applicant.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

VELIKOV & CO OODvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

Han Krum Str., No.7, 7060 Slivo pole, Bulgaria

Represented by

IP CONSULTING LTD.

Holder · RCD owner

ALL NUTS SRLvia PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Str. Lanternei nr.89 Sector 2, Bucuresti, Romania

Represented by

Ráducu Turtoi

Prior art cited (1)

Trade mark

Figurative EUTM 'СОЛЕЙ Слънчоглед печени ядки' (sunflower seeds packaging design), filed for Classes 29, 30 and 31

EUTM No 11 257 334 · EUIPO EUTM register (application published) · disclosed 2012-11-20

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 25(1)(a)Article 25(1)(d)Article 25(1)(e)Article 25(1)(f)Article 4Article 6Article 7(1)Article 3(a)Article 70(1)

Argument summary

  • The design holder (appellant) argued that the contested RCD (sunflower seeds packaging) and the prior EUTM design produced different overall impressions: the RCD depicted Romania's map against its flag colours while the prior design had a different square shape and darker background; also claimed the designer's freedom was limited by packaging regulations and the owner's earlier rights.
  • The invalidity applicant maintained that the conflicting designs coincide in their rectangular shape, sunflower and sunflower seeds imagery, logo position and colour scheme, that designer freedom was unlimited, and that the design holder had acted in bad faith.
  • The Board confirmed that EUTM No 11 257 334 (published November 2012) constituted a valid prior design under Article 7(1) CDR; found the designer's freedom very wide; and held the designs produced the same overall impression due to dominant shared elements (sunflower on seeds, central logo, spray-paint background), with the differences (Romania map, 'fără sare' text, stamp) being minor and less striking.
  • The appeal was dismissed; bad faith ground rejected as outside the exhaustive list of invalidity grounds in Article 25(1) CDR; design holder ordered to bear costs.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurC. Negro
  • MemberE. Fink
  • RegistrarN. Granado Carpenter

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R0181/2025-32025-05-27Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0827/2024-32025-03-10Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1336/2024-32025-03-03Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0797/2024-32025-01-16Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1123/2021-32024-12-10Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1125/2021-32024-12-10Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1124/2021-32024-12-10Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1015/2024-32024-11-07Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5