Invalidity · first instance · 2024-05-22
000120680
Contested design: 008037261-0003
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear 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 008037261. 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
Gyula Szivosvia PDF extraction
Hungary (HU)
Bercsényi utca 6., 5340 Kunhegyes, Hungría
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Nándor Szőnyivia PDF extraction
SK
ul. E.B. Lukáca 1356/36, 94501 Komárno, Eslovaquia
Represented by
Prior art cited (4)
grass grid / slab with circular holes
https://www.facebook.com/113886545376422/photos/a.657718650993206/2819675434797506/ · Facebook (Technoah BV account) · disclosed 2019-10-09
Pro-Techna 1000x1000x65mm grass grid
Facebook (Danny Coert Ko Stanthardt account) · disclosed 2019-07-30
green rectangular grass grid
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2646097305472330&id=100002162590575&set=a.336746656407418&source=57&refid=52&__tn__=EH-R · Facebook (Ko Stanthardt account) · disclosed 2019-12-14
grass grid shown on tfaan.nl Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/tfaan.nl · Facebook (tfaan.nl / Jelte Bosma accounts) · disclosed 2019-10-13
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that disclosures D1 to D4 showed the same slab design before filing, so the contested design lacked novelty and individual character, and its edge connectors were purely technical.
- ›The holder replied that the 2019 disclosures came from former business partners or related parties who had access to its earlier 2012-2014 drawings, so Articles 7(2) and 7(3) applied; it also sought suspension.
- ›The Division found D1, D3 and D4 sufficiently disclosed online, but D2 was not shown clearly enough to qualify as a disclosure under Article 7(1).
- ›It held that the cited disclosures were attributable to the holder's earlier design development and therefore could not count against novelty or individual character under Articles 7(2) and 7(3).
- ›The invalidity grounds under Article 25(1)(b) failed, the application was rejected, and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberIneta GALUBICKE
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000130245 vs G.B.S., s.r.o. | 2026-01-20 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000130202 vs SC PAMABA SRL | 2025-12-16 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000127997 vs Peng Zhang | 2025-12-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000127959 vs Peng Zhang | 2025-12-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000127935 vs Saunasell OÜ | 2025-11-07 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000127897 vs Saunasell OÜ | 2025-11-07 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000127898 vs Saunasell OÜ | 2025-10-20 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000124782 vs D.ELLINAS FACTORY PRODUCTS LTD | 2025-06-25 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |