DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003299486-0010

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-11-11

000108381

Contested design: 003299486-0010

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application against registered Community design No 003299486-0010 is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text(fr)

1. La demande en nullité à l’encontre du dessin ou modèle communautaire enregistré nº 003299486-0010 est rejetée. 2. Le demandeur supporte les frais de la titulaire, fixés à 400 EUR.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Eglo Leuchten GmbHvia PDF extraction

Austria (AT)

Heiligkreuz 22, 6136 Pill, Autriche

Represented by

Taylor Wessing

Holder · RCD owner

Ningbo Xinfeng Lighting Tech. Co., Ltd.

China (CN)

No. 169, Zishan E. Road, Zhangting Town, Yuyao Ningbo, République Populaire de Chine

Represented by

JLA Avocats

Jihad Lahmidi

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD

luminaires

DMC No 002232892-0004 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2013-05-08

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over earlier RCD No 002232892-0004, arguing the differences were minimal and non-visible features should be ignored.
  • The holder said the filing was retaliatory in a broader dispute and merely asserted that the contested design was new and had individual character without developed reasoning.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of the earlier RCD, identified lamps as the sector, and found the designer's freedom broad.
  • It held the different proportions, especially the much longer base of the contested lamp, created a different overall impression on the informed user; minor holes and hidden underside details were secondary.
  • The invalidity application was rejected, the bad-faith allegation was inadmissible, and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES
  • MemberJessica LEWIS
  • MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE

Decision files

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

Locarno classes

26.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130945

vs Space Copenhagen Design ApS

2026-05-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131284

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131264

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131304

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131245

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131366

vs DANMAR TECH SL

2026-04-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131247

vs chao zhai

2026-04-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000129540

vs Ningbo Wilder Outdoor Products Co., Ltd.

2026-03-24REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268