Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2023-08-04
R0003/2023-3
Contested design: 001653676-0002
Outcome
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
HAMSTER Polska Sp. z o.o.via PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
ul. Pod Hałdą 37B, 44206 Rybnik, Poland
Represented by
Anna Agnieszka Szczurek
Holder · RCD owner
Budotechnika Sp. o.o.via PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
ul. Bierawka 2a, 44-145 Pilchowice, Poland
Represented by
Justyna Pawłowska
Prior art cited (3)
photographs of an outdoor toilet
outdoor toilet
Wikipedia / Wayback Machine · Wikipedia and Internet Archive · disclosed 2008-12-02
photographs, advertisement leaflet and email allegedly linked to the Warsaw infrastructure fair toilet
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued the outdoor-toilet design had been disclosed by the design holder in 2008 on the internet and at the Warsaw Infrastructure Fair, so it lacked novelty.
- ›The design holder answered that most photos were undated or unlinkable and that the accepted online image still did not disclose all views needed to show identity with the contested RCD.
- ›The Board held only the novelty ground had been properly invoked, accepted disclosure of one prior design through Wikipedia and the archived webpage, and rejected the remaining photos and email as inadequate proof.
- ›Because the prior design did not reveal the contested RCD's lateral side and interior-related visible features, the designs were not identical and the appeal was dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurC. Bartos
- MemberH. Salmi
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| frFrench | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0116/2025-3 | 2025-07-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0115/2025-3 | 2025-07-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1669/2023-3 | 2024-11-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2453/2023-3 | 2024-10-30 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0952/2021-3 | 2024-09-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2140/2023-3 | 2024-08-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2585/2023-3 | 2024-08-06 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1745/2023-3 | 2024-06-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |