DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001444467-0001

Restitutio in integrum · 2022-06-20

R0613/2022-3

Contested design: 001444467-0001

CDRRCD lapsed at decision

Outcome

Restitutio refused

The appeal is dismissed.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Dismisses the appeal.

CostsNot specified

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Breville Pty Ltdvia PDF extraction

AU

Ground Floor, Suite 2, 170-180 Bourke Road, Alexandria NSW2015, Australia

Holder · RCD owner

No opposing holder — Restitutio in integrum.

Legal grounds invoked

Article 67(1)Article 67(2)Article 67(3)Article 13(3)Article 63

Argument summary

  • After its RCD lapsed for non-renewal, the design holder appealed the decision deeming its restitutio in integrum application not to have been filed and argued that the true cause of non-compliance was discovered only later through an Australian instructing firm.
  • The case was ex parte and concerned whether the request was timely and whether the holder and its renewal service providers had exercised all due care in relation to the missed renewal deadline.
  • The Board held that the obstacle to compliance had been removed when the authorised EUIPO representative received the loss-of-rights notice in August 2021, making the December 2021 restitutio request late; it added that, in any event, the failure resulted from foreseeable human and monitoring errors, not exceptional circumstances.
  • The appeal was dismissed and the lapsed RCD was not restored.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys
  • RapporteurS. Rizzo
  • MemberC. Negro
  • RegistrarH. Dijkema

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
frFrenchhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)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
R0630/2023-32023-12-08Decision confirmedArt 67(2), Art 67(1), Art 67(3)9
R0630/2023-32023-12-08Decision confirmedArt 67(2), Art 67(1), Art 67(3)9
R0630/2023-32023-12-08Decision confirmedArt 67(2), Art 67(1), Art 67(3)9
R0630/2023-32023-12-08Decision confirmedArt 67(2), Art 67(1), Art 67(3)9
R0630/2023-32023-12-08Decision confirmedArt 67(2), Art 67(1), Art 67(3)9
R0630/2023-32023-12-08Decision confirmedArt 67(2), Art 67(1), Art 67(3)9
R0630/2023-32023-12-08Decision confirmedArt 67(2), Art 67(1), Art 67(3)9
R0630/2023-32023-12-08Decision confirmedArt 67(2), Art 67(1), Art 67(3)9