Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2020-03-25
R0501/2019-3
Contested design: 002038133-0002
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed; the design holder is ordered to bear the invalidity applicant's costs in both the invalidity and appeal proceedings, fixed at EUR 1 250.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings; 3. Fixes the costs to be paid by the design holder to the invalidity applicant for the invalidity and the appeal proceedings at EUR 1 250.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €1,250
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
PARFEN OODvia PDF extraction
Bulgaria (BG)
42b, "Koreniacite" str. Entr. "B", app. 23, 1619 Sofia, Bulgaria
Represented by
Kostadin Manev
Holder · RCD owner
REFAN BULGARIA EOODvia PDF extraction
Bulgaria (BG)
Karlovsko shose, 52, Trud, Bulgaria
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
container for liquid contents / cosmetics, amphora-shaped with cylindrical support and dispenser
Bulgarian design registration No 4 609 · Bulgarian Patent Office · disclosed 2003-03-31
container for liquid contents, registered in the name of REFAN OOD
Bulgarian design registration No 4 008 · Bulgarian Patent Office · disclosed 2000-10-31
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›Design holder (appellant) appealed the invalidity decision, arguing procedural violations (Articles 62 and 63 CDR) and that the RCD had individual character: the designs differed in structure (single unit vs. two-part body), colour, and the 'EQUIVALENZA' verbal element.
- ›Invalidity applicant (respondent) contended there was no procedural violation since the holder had commented on Article 6 CDR; colour and structural differences were insufficient to produce a different overall impression given unlimited designer freedom.
- ›The Board found no procedural violation, confirmed the prior design D1 was duly disclosed, and held that the designer's freedom was high; the shared amphora-shaped overall structure dominated, making differences in colour, structure and verbal element insufficient.
- ›The appeal was dismissed; the first-instance invalidation was confirmed and the holder ordered to pay EUR 1 250 in costs.
Deciding panel
- ChairTh. M. Margellos
- RapporteurC. Negro
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarM. Chaleva
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0181/2025-3 | 2025-05-27 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0827/2024-3 | 2025-03-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0797/2024-3 | 2025-01-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1123/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1125/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1124/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |