DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002175802-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-08-08

000119619

Contested design: 002175802-0003

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested Registered Community design No 002175802-0003 is declared invalid, and the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Dem Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung wird stattgegeben. 2. Das eingetragene Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster Nr. 002175802-0003 wird für nichtig erklärt. 3. Die Inhaberin trägt die Kosten, die auf 750 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

LTV Leuchten & Lampen Vertriebsgesellschaft m.b.H.via PDF extraction

Austria (AT)

Industriestraße B Nr. 4, A-2345 Brunn am Gebirge Osterreich

Holder · RCD owner

XAL GmbH

Austria (AT)

Auer-Welsbach-Gasse 36, 8055 Graz, Österreich

Prior art cited (2)

Web disclosureBeilage D

Große Art Deco Bauhaus Hexagon Deckenleuchte

deerbe.com · deerbe.com · disclosed 1933-01-01

National design

sechseckige Leuchte

201030163935.4 · EUIPO Designview · disclosed 2011-02-02

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested lighting design lacked novelty and individual character in light of earlier hexagonal lamp designs disclosed before 31 January 2013.
  • The holder maintained that the contested design was novel and had individual character, and disputed that the Chinese design disclosure was accessible to relevant European circles.
  • The Invalidity Division refused an oral hearing, found the Chinese design had been made available to the public, and treated the informed user as someone familiar with lighting products.
  • Comparing the overall impressions, the Division found the contested design did not differ from the earlier hexagonal lamp design and therefore lacked individual character.
  • The invalidity application was upheld in full, so the Division did not need to assess the separate novelty ground.

Deciding panel

  • MemberAlvaro Sesma Merino
  • MemberWolfgang Schramek
  • MemberBenjamin van Bavel

Decision files

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

Locarno classes

26.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130945

vs Space Copenhagen Design ApS

2026-05-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131284

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131264

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131304

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131245

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131366

vs DANMAR TECH SL

2026-04-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131247

vs chao zhai

2026-04-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000129540

vs Ningbo Wilder Outdoor Products Co., Ltd.

2026-03-24REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268