Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2024-02-26
R1459/2023-3
Contested design: 005253416-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the invalidity applicant must bear the design holder’s costs and fees in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal. 2. Orders the invalidity applicant to bear the costs and fees incurred by the design holder in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
PIETRUCHA INTERNATIONAL SPÓŁKA Z OGRANICZONĄ ODPOWIEDZIALNOŚCIĄvia PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
Przemysłowa 10, 98-235 Błaszki, Poland
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Robert Kaleskivia PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
Bukowa 6, 95-100 Zgierz, Poland
Represented by
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that every visible feature of the contested road-gutter design, including the trapezoidal base, anchoring fin, side panels and angles, was solely dictated by technical function.
- ›The design holder replied that the evidence did not show all visual features were technically inevitable and pointed to proportions, thinness and the Y-shaped cross-section as deliberate design choices.
- ›The Board held that Article 8(1) requires proof that all features of appearance were chosen solely for technical reasons, and it found the evidence too general to establish that at least some key shape features lacked any non-technical design input.
- ›Because at least some features were not shown to be exclusively functional, the Invalidity Division was right to reject the application and the appeal was dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairS. Stürmann
- RapporteurC. Negro
- MemberS. Rizzo
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1394/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 8(1) | — | 5 |
| R1395/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 8(1) | — | 5 |
| R1826/2025-3 | 2026-04-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 8(1) | — | 5 |
| R0947/2025-3 | 2026-04-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 8(1) | — | 5 |
| R2328/2024-3 | 2025-08-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 8(1) | — | 5 |
| R2089/2024-3 | 2025-08-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 8(1) | — | 5 |
| R0204/2024-3 | 2025-06-04 | Decision confirmed | Art 8(1) | — | 5 |
| R0131/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 8(1) | — | 5 |