DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003320555-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-03-19

000107679

Contested design: 003320555-0002

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 003320555-0002 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the applicant’s costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Handelsmaatschappij J. Van Hilst B. V.via PDF extraction

Netherlands (NL)

Elzenweg 19, 5144 MB Waalwijk, Netherlands

Represented by

Holla Advocaten

Holder · RCD owner

Puma SEvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

PUMA Way 1, 91074 Herzogenaurach, Germany

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureAnnexes IV, XVII and XVIII

Puma 'Creepers' sneaker with a crepe sole worn by Rihanna

Rihanna Instagram posts of 16/12/2014 and related online articles · Rihanna Instagram and online fashion/news websites · disclosed 2014-12-16

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 6(1)Article 7(1)Article 7(2)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity because Puma's Creeper sneaker had been publicly disclosed before the claimed priority date and the contested design therefore lacked protection-worthy individual character.
  • The holder argued the application was inadmissible, the cited internet material was unreliable or insufficiently visible to the relevant circles, and the contested design retained individual character.
  • The Division accepted the applicant's supplementary evidence, found the Puma Creepers design had been made available to the public by December 2014, and held that the holder had not rebutted disclosure to specialised EU circles.
  • Comparing the disclosed Creeper shoe with the contested RCD, the Division found only minor differences and concluded that the RCD lacked individual character, so invalidity was granted in full.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberJessica LEWIS
  • MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES

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

02.04

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000132104

vs Shenzhen Damai Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-05-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000127579

vs VICTORIA CARLOTA TERCEÑO JIMENEZ

2026-04-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000131324

vs Song Li

2026-03-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130815

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130769

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130811

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130812

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130814

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028