DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008770184-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-01-27

000117958

Contested design: 008770184-0002

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity 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 0087701840002 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

Jakub Pellervia PDF extraction

Poland (PL)

ul. Bohaterów Warszawy 47, 02495 Warszawa, Poland

Represented by

Rafał Horończyk

Holder · RCD owner

Mollylac Michał Szewczykvia PDF extraction

Poland (PL)

ul. Piotrkowska 270, 90361 Łódź, Poland

Represented by

Maria Przybylska-Karczemska

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosure

"Big Cosmetic Trunk Hz038 Black or Silver" offered for sale on Allegro.pl

https://archiwum.allegro.pl; product ID 8330759964 · archiwum.allegro.pl / Allegro.pl · disclosed 2020-10-20

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested beauty or manicure case lacked novelty and individual character because an almost identical trunk had already been offered on Allegro.pl before the filing date.
  • The holder replied that the online evidence did not sufficiently prove disclosure to specialised EU circles and that several visible differences, especially in the trims, handle, buckle and interior drawers, created a different overall impression.
  • The Invalidity Division accepted the Allegro archive printout as a sufficient internet disclosure under Article 7(1) CDR and compared the black prior trunk with the contested design from the perspective of a highly attentive informed user.
  • It found the designs differed in their shape, reinforcements, handles, covering details and especially the internal arrangement, so the contested design retained individual character and the invalidity application was rejected.

Deciding panel

  • MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES

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

03.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000125601

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125603

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125557

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125596

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125639

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125597

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-05Art 25(1)(b)037
000125555

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-05Art 25(1)(b)037
000125556

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-05Art 25(1)(b)037