Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2026-01-29
R0333/2025-3
Contested design: 007730346-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder must bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal. 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
VIEIRA ARAÚJO, S.A.via PDF extraction
Portugal (PT)
Rua de S. Roque, n.º 104, 3700-273 São João da Madeira, Portugal
Holder · RCD owner
PPACK - Sociedade Unipessoalvia PDF extraction
Portugal (PT)
Rua D. Crisóstomo de Aguiar, n.º 187, 3720-394 Vila de Cucujães, Portugal
Represented by
Márcia Isabel Martinho da Rosa
Prior art cited (1)
handles for carrying
EU design No 002682179-0001 · Community design register · disclosed 2015-04-28
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, sought suspension based on a Portuguese ownership dispute over the prior design, and argued the contested design had individual character given sector constraints, legal requirements, and visible design differences.
- ›The invalidity applicant opposed suspension, said the prior design remained valid prior art regardless of ownership, and argued the designer's freedom was high apart from bottle-neck fit so the designs created the same overall impression.
- ›The Board refused suspension because any self-disclosure or abuse exception under Article 7 had expired years before the 3 March 2020 filing date, so the ownership litigation could not affect the appeal outcome.
- ›On the merits, the Board found the prior registered design was disclosed in 2015, the differences were minor within a high degree of designer freedom, and the contested EUD lacked individual character; the appeal was dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- MemberC. Bartos
- MemberA. González Fernández
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1826/2025-3 | 2026-04-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2322/2024-3 | 2025-05-21 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1)(b), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2551/2023-3 | 2024-11-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1857/2022-3 | 2024-11-08 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1858/2022-3 | 2024-11-08 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2125/2023-3 | 2024-07-24 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0598/2022-3 | 2023-06-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0599/2022-3 | 2023-06-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 7 |