Invalidity · first instance · 2018-05-03
000010633
Contested design: 002618413-0003
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld, the contested registered Community design is declared invalid, and the holder is ordered to pay the applicant’s costs fixed at EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text(es)
Se estima la solicitud de declaración de nulidad. Se declara nulo el dibujo o modelo comunitario registrado nº 0026184130003. Se condena al titular a que sufrague las costas del solicitante, que se fijan en 750 EUR.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Consell Insular d’Eivissa
Spain (ES)
Avda. España, 49, 07800 Ibiza, España
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Serra Vila Gemmavia PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
c/ Romani, 8, 08192 Sant Quirze del Valles, España
Represented by
Prior art cited (4)
article showing traditional espadrilles/alpargatas
Diario de Ibiza, "Cursos que preservan la tradición" · www.diariodeibiza.es · disclosed 2014-06-23
article showing espadrilles/alpargatas
Álvaro de la Rica, "El hombre de la alpargata" · www.alvarodelarica.com · disclosed 2014-04-24
article showing traditional espadrilles/alpargatas
Diario de Ibiza, "Nueva promoción de artesanos de artículos tradicionales" · www.diariodeibiza.es · disclosed 2008-06-22
article showing espadrilles/alpargatas
Francisco Garvi, Fotógrafo, "Espardeñas – Insotel – Ibiza" · franciscogarvi.com · disclosed 2014-10-03
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued the contested espadrille design copied traditional Ibizan espadrilles long present on the market and lacked novelty and individual character.
- ›The holder argued the design was new and singular because visible structural features, rope braiding, fastening, and materials created a different overall impression.
- ›The Invalidity Division accepted D1 to D4 as prior web disclosures before the filing date, but found D2 not identical to the contested design, so the novelty claim failed.
- ›The Division held the shared structure, toe braiding, ankle cords, and materials made the overall impression too similar to D2, so the design lacked individual character and was invalidated.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberIngeborg MENDIETA VETTER
- MemberÁlvaro SESMA MERINO
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| esSpanish | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000132104 vs Shenzhen Damai Network Technology Co., Ltd. | 2026-05-21 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000127579 vs VICTORIA CARLOTA TERCEÑO JIMENEZ | 2026-04-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000131324 vs Song Li | 2026-03-11 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130815 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130769 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130811 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130812 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130814 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |