Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2026-02-26
R0849/2025-3
Contested design: 003060235-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder is ordered to 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
Sowing Success Limitedvia PDF extraction
United Kingdom (GB)
20 Park Road North, WA12 9TE Newton-Le-Willows, United Kingdom
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Heinrich Braunvia PDF extraction
Denmark (DK)
Drisdalsvej 34, 4100 Ringsted, Denmark
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
plant
EU design No 1 562 646-0002 · European Union Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-07-31
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, arguing that the Invalidity Division mischaracterised the designs as artificial plants, exceeded the pleaded grounds, and erred on informed user and overall impression.
- ›The invalidity applicant replied that the registration indication controlled the product category, living organisms are not products under Article 3 CDR, and the prior design alone destroyed individual character.
- ›The Board applied the substantive CDR, treated the contested design as registered for artificial plants, found broad design freedom, and defined the informed user as a purchaser familiar with artificial plants.
- ›Comparing only the registered representations, the Board found the shared elongated twisted stem of intertwined willow rods decisive; the willow tie and any stem-count differences were minor, so individual character was lacking and the appeal failed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- RapporteurA. González Fernández
- MemberM. Bra
- RegistrarE. Wagner
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2274/2025-3 | 2026-05-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0093/2025-3 | 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 |
| R1395/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1394/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1318/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1396/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |