Invalidity · first instance · 2024-06-13
000121119
Contested design: 003759844-0002
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected and the applicant must pay the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 003759844-0002 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Eltor d.o.o.via PDF extraction
HR
Industrijka Ulica 18, Lovrin, Pazin 52000, Croatia
Represented by
Ines Mandekić
Holder · RCD owner
Delta Light NVvia PDF extraction
Belgium (BE)
Muizelstraat 2, 8560 Wevelgem (Moorsele), Belgium
Represented by
Prior art cited (9)
STATE POLE light
Eltor catalogue and applicant account extracts
LINEA light
HESS catalogue
DALVIK light
HESS catalogue and formandlight.com
GENUA light
HESS website extract
CUT light
ROSA catalogue and email
BEAM light
ROSA catalogue and email
SHADE 126 light
Fone Light Technologies catalogue
SHADE 125 light
Fone Light Technologies catalogue
DAEL / PILAR SQ / SQ Cratos light
dael.pt catalogue and website extracts
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of a protectable design, novelty and individual character, relying on outdoor lighting products D1 to D9 and alleging the contested views were unclear.
- ›The holder argued the Polesano luminaire series was distinctive, the application and evidence were poorly structured, several prior designs were not properly disclosed, and the compared designs created different overall impressions.
- ›The Invalidity Division rejected bad-faith and late-added grounds, found the contested registration sufficiently clear under Article 3(a), and held that only D2 and D3 were properly disclosed before the relevant date.
- ›Comparing D2 and D3 with the contested luminaire, the Division found substantial differences in the pole and lamp-head features, upheld novelty and individual character, and rejected the application in full.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES
- MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000128736 vs Senjia (Dongguan)Electronic Technology Co., LTD | 2025-07-11 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000125015 vs Honglan YIN | 2025-02-10 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000124516 vs YUYAO HILITE ELECTRIC CO.,LTD | 2024-12-19 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000121816 vs AMV Technology s.r.o. | 2024-07-12 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000121836 vs AMV Technology s.r.o. | 2024-07-12 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000121120 vs DELTA LIGHT NV | 2024-06-18 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000120900 vs DELTA LIGHT NV | 2024-06-10 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000123474 vs José Joaquim Durães | 2024-04-24 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |