DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 007706304-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-05-02

R1087/2021-3

Contested design: 007706304-0001

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed, and the invalidity applicant must bear the design holder's costs in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.

Show verbatim operative text

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

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

CONTAINERSHIPS - CMA CGM GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Chilehaus A, Fischertwiete 2, 20095 Hambourg, Germany

Holder · RCD owner

ERFOLG s.r.o.via PDF extraction

SK

Hlavná 686/114, 077 01 Kráľovský Chlmec, Slovakia

Represented by

Róbert Porubčan

Prior art cited (1)

Trade mark

Earlier figurative CONTAINERSHIPS mark

EUTM No 8 036 558 · EU trade mark register · disclosed 2019-08-07

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(e)Article 9(2)

Argument summary

  • The invalidity applicant argued that the contested surface-pattern/logo design reproduced the distinctive figurative elements of its earlier CONTAINERSHIPS EUTM and created a likelihood of confusion for overlapping transport-related goods and services.
  • The design holder replied that both signs only shared weak, schematic container-like elements and that the earlier mark's verbal element and differing figurative details prevented confusion.
  • The Board agreed with the Invalidity Division that the signs were only visually similar to a below-average degree and that the earlier mark did not confer a right to prohibit use of the contested RCD under Article 9(2) EUTMR.
  • The appeal was dismissed and the rejection of the invalidity application was confirmed.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys
  • RapporteurA. Szanyi Felkl
  • MemberE. Fink
  • Registrarp.o. R. Vidal

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
R1669/2023-32024-11-18Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(e)5
R0842/2022-32023-03-27Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(e)5
R1688/2021-32022-08-31Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(e)5
R1689/2021-32022-08-31Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(e)5
R1663/2020-32022-08-08Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(e)5
R1553/2019-32020-05-26Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(e)5
R2375/2018-32020-01-20Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(e)5
R0388/2018-32019-06-06Decision annulledArt 25(1)(e)4