Invalidity · first instance · 2023-07-27
000121101
Contested design: 001173363-0001
Outcome
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 001173363-0001 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Solen Cikolata Gida Sanayi Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketivia PDF extraction
Türkiye (TR)
4. Organize Sanayi Bölgesi, 83412 nolu Cadde No:4 Sehitkamil, Gaziantep, Turkey
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Jan Van Dyck
Belgium (BE)
Toekomstlaan, 4, 2200 Herentals, Belgium
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
Image of '36 Chocolata’s Crispy Cacao and Nut' chocolate thins reviewed on the Hot Chocolate blog
http://chocolademelk.blogspot.com/2008/10/chocoladechips.html · Hot Chocolate weblog (chocolademelk.blogspot.com) · disclosed 2008-10-22
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character based on an earlier online disclosure of Hamlet ‘36 Chocolata’s Crispy Cacao and Nut’ shown on a Dutch chocolate blog.
- ›The holder was invited to respond but filed no observations on the invalidity application.
- ›The Division accepted the 22/10/2008 weblog post as prior disclosure under Article 7(1) CDR because it predated the filing date and was not rebutted by the holder.
- ›Comparing the overall impressions, the Division found only minor differences in curvature and borders, insufficient to distinguish the contested chocolate crisp from the earlier design.
- ›The application was upheld and the contested design was declared invalid, with costs awarded against the holder.
Deciding panel
- MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
- MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
- MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129539 vs MOHAMAR JAMOU | 2026-01-14 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 01 | 8 |
| 000126695 vs IKOONA SP. Z O.O. | 2025-10-28 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 01 | 8 |
| 000127155 vs McLLOYD'S s.r.o. | 2025-08-18 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 01 | 8 |
| 000127156 vs McLLOYD'S s.r.o. | 2025-08-18 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 01 | 8 |
| 000127157 vs McLLOYD'S s.r.o. | 2025-08-18 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 01 | 8 |
| 000126116 vs IZVOR COMERCIAL INVEST SRL | 2025-02-17 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 01 | 8 |
| 000120413 vs Hristo Shiderov | 2025-02-07 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 01 | 8 |
| 000126098 vs EYADA GLOBAL SYSTEM GROUP | 2024-10-25 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 01 | 8 |