DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003521053-0015

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2021-01-18

R2051/2019-3

Contested design: 003521053-0015

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The contested decision is annulled, the RCD is declared invalid, and the design holder must pay EUR 2,050 in costs and fees to the invalidity applicant.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Annuls the contested decision and declared the Community design No 3 521 053-0015 invalid; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs and fees 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 appeal proceedings at EUR 2 050.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €2,050

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

CALITEX S.A.via PDF extraction

France (FR)

B.P. 59405, 59405 Cambrai Cedex, France

Represented by

David Lefranc

Holder · RCD owner

VAN DER HAEGEN & NECKEBROECK, bvbavia PDF extraction

Belgium (BE)

Pamelstraat Oost 450, B-9400 Ninove, Belgium

Represented by

Christian Defauw

Prior art cited (1)

CatalogAnnex 15

tablecloth ornamentation with starfish, lifebuoy, ropes, beach huts, shells and heart on wood-plank background

TB 1638 / Fond Marin · 2014-2015 MP catalogue

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5Article 7(1)Article 70(1)

Argument summary

  • The invalidity applicant appealed the rejection of its novelty and individual-character attack on a marine-themed tablecloth design and relied on a 2014-2015 catalogue plus later product offers and orders for the same pattern called 'Fond Marin'.
  • The design holder argued that the alleged earlier disclosures were either unauthorised and grace-period protected or insufficiently linked to the contested design.
  • The Board held that the catalogue and commercial emails proved pre-filing disclosure and that the grace-period argument failed because the 2014 catalogue predated the relevant 12-month period.
  • The compared designs were identical in their arrangement of starfish, ropes, beach huts, shells, heart and planked background, so the RCD lacked novelty and was declared invalid.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurC. Bartos
  • MemberE. Fink
  • RegistrarH.Dijkema

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
R2504/2022-32023-06-28Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2030/2022-32023-06-07Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2415/2018-32023-03-01Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2416/2018-32023-03-01Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2417/2018-32023-03-01Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2443/2020-32023-01-17Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R0068/2022-32023-01-09Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R0092/2022-32022-10-25Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5