Invalidity · first instance · 2018-04-16
000010837
Contested design: 003036516-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, RCD No 003036516-0001 is declared invalid, and the holders must pay the applicant’s fixed costs of EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text
The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 003036516-0001 is declared invalid. 3. The holders bear the applicant’s costs, fixed at EUR 750.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Fishers Gin Ltd
United Kingdom (GB)
First Floor, 15 Young Street, London W8 5EH, United Kingdom
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Koval Inc.via PDF extraction
United States (US)
4241 N Ravenswood Ave, Chicago, Illinois 60613, United States of America
Prior art cited (4)
KOVAL Dry Gin label shown in an article entitled “KOVAL Dry Gin”.
http://www.thedieline.com · thedieline.com · disclosed 2014-11-12
KOVAL Dry Gin label shown in a “News from Our Readers” article and image gallery.
http://www.packagedesignmag.com · packagedesignmag.com · disclosed 2014-12-15
KOVAL Dry Gin label shown in a press release titled “KOVAL Distillery Launches Organic Dry Gin”.
http://www.bevnet.com · bevnet.com · disclosed 2014-11-10
KOVAL Dry Gin label shown in a post titled “KOVAL Dry Gin on Packaging of the World – Creative Package Design Gallery”.
http://www.packagingoftheworld.com · packagingoftheworld.com · disclosed 2014-12-16
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, arguing that an identical KOVAL Dry Gin label had been publicly disclosed before the filing date and outside the grace period.
- ›The holders filed no observations and did not rebut the applicant’s evidence of prior online disclosure.
- ›The Division accepted the 2014 packaging-design website publications as solid evidence that the prior label had been made available to the public under Article 7 CDR.
- ›It found the contested and prior labels identical apart from negligible wording differences and omitted pictograms, so the contested RCD lacked novelty under Article 5 CDR.
- ›The invalidity application was upheld, the RCD was declared invalid in full, and the holders were ordered to pay EUR 750 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000131384 vs Ningbo Yinzhou Wowo International Trade Co., Ltd. | 2026-03-13 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 19 | 8 |
| 000131626 vs Ningbo Yinzhou Wowo International Trade Co., Ltd. | 2026-03-13 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 19 | 8 |
| 000130967 vs Shenzhen Zhimei Chuangke E-commerce Co., Ltd. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 19 | 8 |
| 000127580 vs JADWIGA ŁOWKIEWICZ | 2025-10-22 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 19 | 8 |
| 000129366 vs FHU Jarosław Wolski | 2025-10-16 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 19 | 8 |
| 000129423 vs AFFARGO LTD | 2025-10-14 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 19 | 8 |
| 000128919 vs Shenzhen Langmi Technology Co., Ltd | 2025-07-31 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 19 | 8 |
| 000126063 vs STADA Arzneimittel AG | 2024-10-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 19 | 8 |