DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001050645-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-11-28

000115525

Contested design: 001050645-0003

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

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 001050645-0003 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Guangdong Qman Toys Industry Co.,Ltdvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

Intersection of West Side of Xingye West 2nd Road and North Side of Xingye South Road, Laimei Industrial Zone, Chenghai District, Shantou, Guangdong 515000, China

Represented by

von Bülow & Tamada

Holder · RCD owner

Lego A/S

Denmark (DK)

Aastvej 1, 7190 Billund, Denmark

Represented by

Bomhard IP, S.L.

Prior art cited (1)

Prior use

building block with one stud and a clamp from a toy construction set

LEGO piece No 61252 from toy construction set No 7241 "Fire Car" · Brickset.com printout concerning LEGO set No 7241 "Fire Car"

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 8(1)Article 8(3)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that all essential features were dictated by technical function and that the design also lacked individual character over LEGO piece No 61252 from the 2005 Fire Car set.
  • The holder replied that the design was protected as part of a modular system under Article 8(3) and that the cited earlier piece differed materially in appearance.
  • The Division held that the interconnection features relied on by the applicant fell within the modular-system exception, so Article 8(1) could not invalidate the design on those arguments.
  • It accepted disclosure of the earlier 2005 LEGO piece and found that doubling the plate length and minor underside differences did not change the overall impression on the informed user.
  • The application was upheld because the contested design lacked individual character, and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
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