DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008061774-0019

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-06-28

000120364

Contested design: 008061774-0019

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the proprietor must pay EUR 750 in costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Declares registered Community design No 008061774-00019 to be invalid. 3. Orders the proprietor to bear the costs, which are fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Vidal Golosinas, S.A.via PDF extraction

Spain (ES)

Avda. GUTIERREZ Mellado s/n, 30500 Molina de Segura (Murcia) Spain

Represented by

ars Privilegium, S.L.

Holder · RCD owner

hitschler International GmbH sheets Co. KGvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

An der Hasenkaule 10, 50354 Hürth, Germany

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureD1

earlier sweet design shown as a cylindrical bar with slightly flattened ends and sugar additives or a white speckled surface

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFawbANs9qY · YouTube

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on earlier disclosed sweets designs, including D1, evidenced by periodical, social-media, website and video materials.
  • The proprietor filed no observations on the merits and only argued separately that representation costs should not be fixed at the maximum amount across related cases.
  • The Division found D1 had been made available to the public before the filing date and used it as the main comparison design for procedural economy.
  • Given the high designer freedom for sweets and the near identity of the compared features, the contested design created no different overall impression and lacked individual character.
  • The application was upheld in full, the contested design was declared invalid, and the proprietor was ordered to bear the costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberALVARO SOCMERINO
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

01.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000129539

vs MOHAMAR JAMOU

2026-01-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)018
000126695

vs IKOONA SP. Z O.O.

2025-10-28REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)018
000127155

vs McLLOYD'S s.r.o.

2025-08-18REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)018
000127156

vs McLLOYD'S s.r.o.

2025-08-18REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)018
000127157

vs McLLOYD'S s.r.o.

2025-08-18REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)018
000126116

vs IZVOR COMERCIAL INVEST SRL

2025-02-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)018
000120413

vs Hristo Shiderov

2025-02-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)018
000126097

vs EYADA GLOBAL SYSTEM GROUP

2024-10-25REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)018