DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001601584-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-11-18

000113801

Contested design: 001601584-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear 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 0016015840001 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

Julien Srilanvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Am Greut 4a, 91595 Burgoberbach, Germany

Holder · RCD owner

Carol Baxter

United Kingdom (GB)

Fairwinds, 18 Victory Road, West Mersea, Colchester CO5 8LX, United Kingdom

Prior art cited (2)

National designD1

French prior design registration relied on for novelty attack

French design No. 021610001 · INPI French design database / Designview portal

National designD2

French prior design registration relied on for novelty attack

French design No. 040544002 · INPI French design database / Designview portal

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5(1)Article 5(2)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • Applicant argued the contested RCD lacked novelty because it differed only in insignificant details from French designs D1 and D2 disclosed before the filing date.
  • Holder replied that the cited French designs were not identical, the differences were significant to the informed user, and designer freedom was limited for the relevant features.
  • The Division limited the case to novelty, accepted the untranslated French evidence, and found visible differences in width, shape, corners, and colour versus both prior designs.
  • Because the differences were not immaterial under Article 5(2) CDR, the contested design was held new over D1 and D2 and the application was rejected.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI

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

06.11

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000127357

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-13Art 25(1)(b)067
000127356

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-12Art 25(1)(b)067
000127340

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-06Art 25(1)(b)067
000121199

vs MANUTTI BVBA

2024-05-16Art 25(1)(b)067
000120918

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120869

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120920

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120919

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067