DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 015009749-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-10-26

000121570

Contested design: 015009749-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

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 015009749-0001 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Domain Menada Eoodvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

Business Park Sofia 1, bl. 4, fl. 2, Sofia, Bulgaria

Represented by

Deyan Vulchev Ivanov

Holder · RCD owner

Nuvo Konseptvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

бул. Ал.Дондуков № 57, вх. А, ет.1, ап. 6, 1000 СОФИЯ, Bulgaria

Represented by

Atanas Kostov

Prior art cited (2)

Registered RCD

bottle with label / beverage bottle

RCD No. 008438477-0003 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2021-03-02

CatalogExhibit 2

Romanian Metro hypermarket brochure showing a bottle with a label of an alcoholic drink

www.issuu.com · Romanian Metro chain brochure on Issuu

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued the holder re-filed the same bottle design previously invalidated and that the contested design lacked novelty over earlier RCD No 008438477-0003.
  • The applicant also invoked public policy and morality concerns under Article 9 CDR and filed a brochure as additional evidence; the holder filed no observations.
  • The Invalidity Division held unfair or dishonest conduct is not an autonomous invalidity ground under Article 25(1) CDR, so that part of the application was inadmissible.
  • It accepted disclosure of earlier RCD No 008438477-0003 through Bulletin publication and found the prior and contested bottle designs identical in all relevant features.
  • The application was upheld for lack of novelty, the contested design was declared invalid, and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • 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

09.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131325

vs HaoJun Zhu

2026-05-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000131965

vs Jiaxing Xiaotian Environmental Protection Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-05-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130985

vs Suzhou Hongmao Import & Export Trade Co.,Ltd

2026-03-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130944

vs Shenzhen Tajinxuan Trading Co.,Ltd.

2026-02-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130968

vs Shenzhen Zhimei Chuangke E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-02-05REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000129539

vs MOHAMAR JAMOU

2026-01-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130088

vs Mindful eCom OÜ

2025-12-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000129281

vs VERONIKI ECOGRUP SRL

2025-11-04REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098