Invalidity · first instance · 2018-05-11
000010634
Contested design: 002848564-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, registered Community design No 0028485640001 is declared invalid, and the holder must 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 0028485640001. 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 (5)
article showing an espadrille design
http://www.diariodeibiza.es · Diario de Ibiza · disclosed 2014-06-23
article showing an espadrille design
http://www.alvarodelarica.com · Álvaro de la Rica · disclosed 2012-04-22
article showing an espadrille design
http://www.diariodeibiza.es · Diario de Ibiza · disclosed 2008-06-22
article showing an espadrille design
http://franciscogarvi.com · Francisco Garvi, Fotógrafo · disclosed 2014-10-03
article showing an espadrille design
http://lomejordelavidadespeina.blogspot.com.es · Lo mejor de la vida despeina · disclosed 2015-07-01
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued the contested espadrille design copied traditional Ibizan espadrilles already present on the market and therefore lacked novelty and individual character.
- ›The holder argued the design was novel and had individual character because the external structure, rope braiding, tying method, width, and number of bands differed from existing models.
- ›The Division accepted D1 to D5 as prior online disclosures under Article 7 and, for procedural economy, compared the contested design first with D2.
- ›It found D2 not identical to the contested RCD, so the novelty ground failed, but held the common shape, horizontal braiding, ankle lacing, and materials created the same overall impression.
- ›The application was upheld because the contested design lacked individual character under Article 6, and the holder was ordered to pay EUR 750 in costs.
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 |