DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 006371787-0011

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-07-02

000107321

Contested design: 006371787-0011

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld; the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 0063717870011 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

LEGO Juris A/Svia PDF extraction

Denmark (DK)

Koldingvej 2, 7190 Billund, Denmark

Represented by

Bomhard IP, S.L.

Holder · RCD owner

MAR 2000 OOD

Bulgaria (BG)

JK ‘Nadejda’, 5, Stefanson str., 1220 Sofia, Bulgaria

Represented by

Bureau Ignatov & Son

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosure

Packaging motif showing Ariel on a boat with a gangway and a floating island with Sebastian

LEGO Disney Ariel's Royal Celebration Boat Set No 41153 · Amazon.es / Amazon.co.uk product listings, supported by LEGO catalogues, YouTube, Brickipedia and brickinstructions.com · disclosed 2018-01-01

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested design copied the Ariel's Royal Celebration Boat packaging motif from LEGO set No 41153, disclosed before the filing date through catalogues and multiple websites.
  • The holder disputed disclosure and reliability of the internet evidence, objected to untranslated materials, and maintained the contested design differed because it was a construction set rather than packaging.
  • The Invalidity Division accepted the combined web and catalogue evidence as sufficient proof of pre-filing disclosure to specialised circles and rejected the holder's unsupported manipulation and accessibility objections.
  • Comparing only the disclosed design features, the Division found the prior motif and contested design identical, so the RCD lacked novelty and had to be declared invalid with costs against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO

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

21.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131885

vs Zhenkai Cui

2026-04-30REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000129622

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000129681

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000126976

vs Dohány Kft.

2026-04-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000131547

vs Brandworl Management Co., Limited

2026-04-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000131507

vs Shenzhen Chenyu New Energy Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-03-31REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000130128

vs joboo GmbH

2026-02-03REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000130086

vs CROSS BORDEP (HK) CO., LIMITED

2026-02-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218