Invalidity · first instance · 2023-06-02
000119859
Contested design: 008753420-0002
Outcome
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 008753420-0002 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
IPARLUX S.à.r.l.via PDF extraction
LU
20, rue Michel Rodange, 2430 Luxembourg, Luxembourg
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
BoZarc
Belgium (BE)
Boomsesteenweg 41 bus2, 2630 Aartselaar, Belgium
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
pergola/canopy presented at the Batibouw exhibition
Facebook posts of 28/02/2020 and 29/02/2020 · Facebook
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on a pergola design allegedly disclosed at Batibouw 2020 and on Facebook before the filing date.
- ›The applicant argued the designs shared the same basic structure, proportions, legs, frame and roof features, and that the designer had broad freedom in the sector.
- ›The holder requested an extension but ultimately filed no observations in reply.
- ›The Invalidity Division accepted Appendix 3b as proof of prior disclosure but found visible differences in the roof border and beam arrangement that changed the overall impression.
- ›The Division held the contested design had individual character and novelty, rejected the invalidity application, and awarded costs against the applicant.
Deciding panel
- MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
- MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
- MemberElisabetta FERRARO
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000128596 vs Griptel AB | 2025-07-17 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000124436 vs Ziel Home Furnishing Technology Co., Ltd. | 2024-11-19 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000121138 vs TABB Interior Systems B.V. | 2024-01-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000121099 vs TABB Interior Systems B.V. | 2024-01-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000121100 vs TABB Interior Systems B.V. | 2024-01-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000120379 vs Ergosafe Aktiebolag | 2023-10-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000120958 vs Yimei Zhu | 2023-07-27 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000117077 vs Budotechnika Sp. o.o. | 2022-12-13 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |