DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003447986-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-01-31

000117692

Contested design: 003447986-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 003447986-0001 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

Gemini Koncepthuset A/Svia PDF extraction

Denmark (DK)

Lyngbyvej 415, 2820 Gentofte, Denmark

Represented by

Otello Law Firm

Holder · RCD owner

Splash About International Limited

United Kingdom (GB)

Unit 3 Beels Road Stallingborough, Grimsby North East Lincolnshire DN41 8DN, United Kingdom

Represented by

Wilson Gunn (Europe)

Prior art cited (15)

Web disclosureD1

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD2

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD3

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD4

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD5

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD6

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD7

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD8

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD9

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD10

swimwear for babies

https://www.splashabout.com · Internet Archive / splashabout.com

Web disclosureD11⚠ rejected as evidence

design of swimwear for babies shown in alleged holder social-media post

alleged holder Facebook post · disclosed 2015-07-03

Web disclosureD12

swimwear for babies shown in 'Splash About Happy Nappy Review'

http://motherbaby.com · motherbaby.com · disclosed 2015-09-15

Web disclosureD13

swim nappies for babies

https://www.konfidence.co.uk · Internet Archive / konfidence.co.uk · disclosed 2006-05-15

Web disclosureD14

swim nappies for babies

https://www.konfidence.co.uk · Internet Archive / konfidence.co.uk · disclosed 2006-05-15

Web disclosureD15

swim nappies for babies

https://www.konfidence.co.uk · Internet Archive / konfidence.co.uk · disclosed 2006-05-15

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5(1)(b)Article 5(2)Article 7Article 8(1)

Argument summary

  • Applicant argued the swim nappy design was solely dictated by technical function and lacked novelty in light of earlier swim-nappy disclosures D1-D15.
  • Holder replied that the designer had choices of shape, colours and decoration, and that the cited prior designs were not identical to the contested design.
  • The Division found the applicant had not shown that all essential features were solely dictated by technical function, so Article 8(1) CDR did not invalidate the design.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of D1-D10, D12 and D13-D15, rejected D11 as insufficiently proven, and held none of the accepted prior designs were identical in immaterial details only.
  • The invalidity application was rejected in full and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • 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

02.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000123916

vs Crocs, Inc.

2024-11-18Art 25(1)(b)027
000123935

vs Crocs, Inc.

2024-11-18Art 25(1)(b)027
000120862

vs Dongguan Zhicheng Lighting Co., Ltd.

2024-11-06Art 25(1)(b)027
000122914

vs JSP Limited

2024-04-25Art 25(1)(b)027
000122915

vs JSP Limited

2024-04-25Art 25(1)(b)027
000121459

vs Birkenstock IP GmbH

2024-04-09Art 25(1)(b)027
000121479

vs Birkenstock IP GmbH

2024-04-08Art 25(1)(b)027
000121478

vs Birkenstock IP GmbH

2024-04-04Art 25(1)(b)027