DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004157022-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2018-12-21

000102465

Contested design: 004157022-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 0041570220001 is rejected. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Tri Star Ltd

UA

Polevaya str. 5, Cherniakhovka village, Kirovograd region, Cherniakhovka, Ukraine

Represented by

Lupsa si Asociatii

Ionut Lupsa

Holder · RCD owner

Ionel-Alin Nitavia PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Sos. Oltenitei, 133, bl. 55 sc. 1, ap. 4, Bucuresti, Romania

Represented by

Eugen Ardeleanu

Prior art cited (2)

OtherAnnex 1⚠ rejected as evidence

Printout of a picture said to depict the applicant's packaging

Web disclosureAnnex 2⚠ rejected as evidence

Printouts from the VK social media portal showing the applicant's packaging

VK posts dated 19/12/2014 and 24/10/2014 · VK

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant alleged bad faith and argued that its packaging design had been disclosed since 2013 in trade, exhibitions, publications and on the internet, so the contested RCD lacked novelty and individual character.
  • The holder replied that the applicant's evidence did not prove when the alleged earlier design had been made available to the public.
  • The Division held that bad faith is not an admissible ground under Article 25(1) CDR and that the annexes, especially unsupported VK screenshots, did not provide solid and objective proof of disclosure under Article 7(1) CDR.
  • Because prior disclosure was not proven, the application was rejected without examining novelty or individual character further, and the applicant was ordered to pay costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

09.03

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000115888

vs SEDA INTERNATIONAL PACKAGING GROUP SPA

2022-02-09Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)098
000115908

vs SEDA INTERNATIONAL PACKAGING GROUP SPA

2022-02-08Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)098
000104119

vs Dzhihangir Ibryam

2019-10-17Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)098
000103859

vs PHOENIX IND SA

2019-07-26Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)098
000011140

vs GAMMA-A, SIA

2019-02-25Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)098
000011250

vs Guy Vanhoutte

2019-01-28Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)098
000011251

vs Guy Vanhoutte

2019-01-28Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)098
000102462

vs TURCU GEANI-CRISTIAN

2018-12-21Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)098