Invalidity · first instance · 2024-03-13
000119003
Contested design: 000729785-0008
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity against Registered Community design No 000729785-0008 is dismissed, and the applicant is ordered to pay the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(es)
1. Se desestima la solicitud de declaración de nulidad del modelo comunitario registrado n.º 000729785-0008. 2. Se condena al solicitante a que sufrague las costas del titular, fijadas en 400 EUR.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Chanel SASvia PDF extraction
France (FR)
135 avenue Charles de Gaulle, 92200 Neuilly Sur Seine, Francia
Represented by
Marie Georges-Picot
Holder · RCD owner
Molo Design Ltd
CA
1470 Venables Street, Vancouver, BC V5L 2G7, Canadá
Prior art cited (8)
flexible furniture system
US 7,866,366 B2 · United States patent publication · disclosed 2011-01-11
Charles Kaisin expandable K-Bench design
www.navigart.fr · navigart.fr · disclosed 2002-12-31
Charles Kaisin K-Bench design
Architecture intérieure Créée No 306 · Architecture intérieure Créée · disclosed 2002-12-31
Orange extendible K-Bench
Charles Kaisin, Design in Motion · Charles Kaisin, Design in Motion · disclosed 2005-12-31
Opal blue extendible K-Bench
Charles Kaisin, Design in Motion · Charles Kaisin, Design in Motion · disclosed 2007-12-31
Charles Kaisin K-Bench website variant
www.charleskaisin.com · charleskaisin.com
modular furniture / partition design
RCD No 000460258-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2006-02-21
Tokujin Yoshioka Honey-Pop President chair
Milan Furniture Fair and related publications · disclosed 2002-12-31
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity on the grounds of technical function, lack of novelty, and lack of individual character, relying on a patent, Charles Kaisin's K-Bench variants, the holder's earlier RCD, and Tokujin Yoshioka's Honey-Pop design.
- ›The holder argued the contested design was not solely dictated by technical function, several alleged similarities concerned unprotectable ideas or structure, and the prior designs created different overall impressions.
- ›The Division held the applicant had not shown that the seat's appearance was solely dictated by technical function under Article 8(1), accepted disclosure only for D1.1-D1.3, D2, and D3, and disregarded later-added prior designs and insufficiently proven D1.4-D1.5.
- ›It found the contested design remained new and had individual character over the admissible prior art, so the invalidity application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000128656 vs Washtower IP B.V. | 2026-05-19 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |
| 000128557 vs Washtower IP B.V. | 2026-05-19 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |
| 000129371 vs joboo GmbH | 2026-05-05 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |
| 000128978 vs Franco Ferri S.R.L. | 2026-04-13 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |
| 000131627 vs Shuifa XIE | 2026-03-31 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |
| 000130974 vs Højer Møbler A/S | 2026-03-10 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |
| 000128937 vs Liyou Industrial Co., Ltd | 2026-02-24 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |
| 000128579 vs Washtower IP B.V. | 2026-02-23 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |