Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-12-04
R1483/2024-3
Contested design: 008037261-0001
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
Dismisses the appeal. 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
Gyula Szivosvia PDF extraction
Hungary (HU)
Bercsényi utca 6., 5340 Kunhegyes, Hungary
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Nándor SZŐNYIvia PDF extraction
SK
UL.E.B. LUKÁCA 1356/36, 94501 Komárno, Slovakia
Represented by
Prior art cited (4)
rubber grass grid with circular openings
Technoah BV Facebook post of 09/10/2019 · Technoah BV Facebook account · disclosed 2019-10-09
Pro-Techno 1000x1000x65mm grass grid
Danny Coert Ko Stanthardt Facebook post of 30/07/2019 · Danny Coert Ko Stanthardt Facebook account · disclosed 2019-07-30
green grass grid
Ko Stanthardt Facebook post of 14/12/2019 · Ko Stanthardt Facebook account · disclosed 2019-12-14
grass grid disclosed on Facebook posts by Technoah distributors
https://www.facebook.com/tfaan.nl · Facebook · disclosed 2019-10-13
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that D1 to D4 disclosed the same slab design before filing, so the contested REUD lacked novelty and individual character.
- ›The design holder replied that the 2019 disclosures came from former business partners who had access to his 2012-2013 drawings, making them abusive disclosures within Article 7(3).
- ›The Board accepted D1 to D4 as public disclosures, including D2, but found they derived from the design holder's earlier drawings through shared business contacts rather than independent creation.
- ›Because Article 7(3) excluded D1 to D4 from the novelty and individual-character assessment, the invalidity application remained rejected and the appeal was dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- MemberC. Negro
- MemberA. Pohlmann
- RegistrarK. Zajfert
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1482/2024-3 | 2025-12-04 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(3) | — | 7 |
| R1484/2024-3 | 2025-12-04 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(3) | — | 7 |
| R1481/2024-3 | 2025-12-04 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(3) | — | 7 |
| R0093/2025-3 | 2026-05-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2274/2025-3 | 2026-05-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2273/2025-3 | 2026-05-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1575/2025-3 | 2026-04-29 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1318/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |