R0264/2024-3

• ›The RCD holder sought restitutio after missing the renewal deadline, blaming confusion between the EU RCD and its post-Brexit cloned UK right, plus pandemic disruption at coordinating US firm Roy Kiesel.
• ›The Operations Department found the request admissible but unfounded because the representatives should have recognised the UK-only renewal reminder and investigated the discrepancy in territory and numbering.
• ›On appeal, the holder argued Roy Kiesel was not subject to the full due-care standard, reasonably believed the EU right had been renewed, and could not maintain its paper-based records normally during COVID-19 restrictions.
• ›The Board held Article 67 CDR due care had to be assessed mainly against EU representative Potter Clarkson A/S, which failed to explain any monitoring system or clear communications about separate UK and EU renewals.
• ›Because Brexit and the pandemic did not excuse the missing safeguards or the missed EU renewal, the Board dismissed the appeal and restitutio remained refused.

• ChairS. Stürmann
• RapporteurC. Bartos
• MemberE. Fink
• Registrarp.o. R. Vidal Romero

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.