DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 005306784-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-08-05

000104239

Contested design: 005306784-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 5306784-0001 is rejected, and the applicant is ordered to bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text(es)

1. Se deniega la solicitud de declaración de nulidad del dibujo o modelo comunitario registrado nº 5306784-0001. 2. Se condena al solicitante a que sufrague las costas del titular, fijadas en 400 EUR.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Guillem Trabal

Spain (ES)

C. Puigcerdà 17, Les Masies de Voltregà (Barcelona), España

Holder · RCD owner

Replic Hockey SLvia PDF extraction

Spain (ES)

Avda. País Valencià, 68, 03801 Alcoy, España

Prior art cited (2)

Registered RCD

palos de hockey

3667849-0001 · Boletín de Dibujos y Modelos Comunitarios · disclosed 2017-02-09

Other⚠ rejected as evidence

printed series of images of hockey sticks

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4Article 5Article 6(1)Article 7

Argument summary

  • The applicant claimed the contested hockey stick lacked novelty and individual character over an earlier Community design and shared the same key stick features.
  • The holder argued the contested design had different construction, grip, blade angle, ornamentation and colours, and said prior disclosure had not been properly proven.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of the earlier RCD through its EUIPO bulletin publication but found the compared designs were not identical for novelty purposes.
  • For individual character, the Division held that regulatory constraints reduced the weight of shared functional features, while visible differences in construction and ornamentation created a different overall impression.
  • The invalidity application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberIngeborg MENDIETA VETTER
  • MemberÁlvaro SESMA MERINO

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esSpanishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

21.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000109222

vs DELTA-SPORT Handelskontor GmbH

2020-02-12Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)218
000109203

vs DELTA-SPORT Handelskontor GmbH

2020-02-11Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)218
000105502

vs NIKE Innovate C.V.

2019-10-08Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)218
000105761

vs Hui ZENG

2019-09-13Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)218
000105219

vs CHROME CHERRY DESIGN STUDIO (PTY) LTD

2019-07-30Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)218
000011219

vs TCC Global N.V.

2018-12-03Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)218
000011052

vs Qizhi Chen

2018-08-28Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)218
000010565

vs Peter Lippert

2018-06-08Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)218