DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 005666146-0008

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-04-02

000105819

Contested design: 005666146-0008

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected and the applicant must pay the holder’s costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 005666146-0008 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Sourceable Limitedvia PDF extraction

United Kingdom (GB)

91-93 Great Eastern Street, City of London EC2A 3HZ, United Kingdom

Represented by

Gunnercooke LLP

Holder · RCD owner

Made.com Design Limitedvia PDF extraction

United Kingdom (GB)

5 Singer Street, London EC2A 4BQ, United Kingdom

Represented by

Bird & Bird LLP

Prior art cited (3)

National designD1⚠ rejected as evidence

table design shown in UKIPO database screenshots

UK design No 6 010 512 · UKIPO online database

Web disclosureD2

THE NICOLE OCCASIONAL TABLE

https://twitter.com · Twitter · disclosed 2014-10-09

Web disclosureD3

table design shown in Instagram post and annakarlin.com screenshot

https://www.instagram.com · Instagram · disclosed 2018-05-19

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of individual character over three earlier table designs, relying on a UK design filing and web disclosures from Twitter and Instagram.
  • The holder disputed disclosure of all prior designs, argued the prior art for dining tables was crowded, and maintained the contested design created a different overall impression.
  • The Division rejected D1 because no publication date was shown, but accepted D2 and D3 as prior internet disclosures before the filing date.
  • Despite some shared table features, the Division found significant differences in the tabletop, metallic connector, base shape, materials, and overall appearance.
  • The contested RCD retained individual character, so the invalidity application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

06.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000117049

vs Ludwik Styl Spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością Spółka komandytowa w restrukturyzacji

2022-03-16Art 25(1)(b)067
000113382

vs Stern GmbH & Co. KG

2021-08-11Art 25(1)(b)067
000107999

vs ANJI WEIYU FURNITURE CO., LTD.

2020-06-25Art 25(1)(b)067
000105839

vs Next Retail Limited

2020-04-06Art 25(1)(b)067
000105820

vs Made.com Design Limited

2020-03-13Art 25(1)(b)067
000108147

vs Ejoy law Group

2020-02-04Art 25(1)(b)067
000131404

vs Jiahe Lin

2026-05-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)065
000128557

vs Washtower IP B.V.

2026-05-19Art 25(1)(b)065