DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 015003904-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2025-11-07

000127897

Contested design: 015003904-0003

EUDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

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 EU design No 0150039040003 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

Ecosauna Project OÜvia PDF extraction

ET

Põlva maakond, Estonia

Holder · RCD owner

Saunasell OÜ

ET

Võnnu alevik, Kastre vald, Tartumaa, Estonia

Represented by

Anna Kosar

Prior art cited (21)

Web disclosureD1

design shown on Leisurecraft Inc Facebook page

Facebook page of Leisurecraft Inc · disclosed 2018-05-24

Web disclosureD2

Dundalk LeisureCraft Luna Sauna with Porch Assembly

YouTube · disclosed 2018-11-14

Web disclosureD3

design shown on Sauna.is – Takjatakni ehf. Facebook page

Facebook page of Sauna.is – Takjatakni ehf. · disclosed 2020-10-26

Web disclosureD4

Outdoor Cedar Luna Sauna from Log Furniture and More

YouTube · disclosed 2019-11-25

Registered RCDD5⚠ rejected as evidence

transportable buildings

EU design No 0091875030001 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2022-09-29

PublicationD6

Wallenium building

Projekt & Ehitus 2007

Web disclosureD7

Framery 2Q pod building

https://workdesign.com · workdesign.com · disclosed 2019-02-15

Web disclosureD8

BZB Oval sauna

https://fieldmag.com · archive.org / fieldmag.com · disclosed 2022-07-06

Web disclosureD9

Oval Barrel Sauna

https://inhottub.be · archive.org / inhottub.be · disclosed 2021-01-21

CatalogD10⚠ rejected as evidence

camping house design from Inmedias Res OÜ Wooden Buildings Catalogue

Inmedias Res OÜ Wooden Buildings Catalogue

CatalogD11⚠ rejected as evidence

camping house design from Inmedias Res OÜ Wooden Buildings Catalogue

Inmedias Res OÜ Wooden Buildings Catalogue

Registered RCDD12

saunas

EU design No 0005307200005 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2006-08-01

Registered RCDD13

transportable buildings, houses, garages and other buildings

EU design No 0043504520003 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2017-09-28

Registered RCDD14

transportable buildings

EU design No 0033059940001 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2016-07-21

Registered RCDD15

portable cabins

EU design No 0025703410001 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2014-11-05

Registered RCDD16

portable cabins

EU design No 0025703410002 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2014-11-05

Registered RCDD17

telephone boxes, storage furniture, buildings [transportable] and advertising devices

EU design No 0019358420001 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2012-01-17

Registered RCDD18

video-conferencing booths

EU design No 0015952990001 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2009-07-31

Registered RCDD19

modular houses

EU design No 0065929110001 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2019-07-10

Registered RCDD20

modular houses

EU design No 0065929110002 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2019-07-10

Registered RCDD21

modular houses

EU design No 0065929110003 · EU Designs Register · disclosed 2019-07-10

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5(1)(b)Article 5(2)Article 6(1)(b)Article 6(2)Article 7(1)Article 7(2)

Argument summary

  • The applicant alleged lack of novelty and individual character over internet disclosures and earlier EU designs, arguing the informed user would focus on the exterior cuboid form and that designer freedom was high.
  • The holder argued the design was a portable outdoor sauna with a distinctive fully glazed front, dark tiled shell and visible interior, and that the cited prior designs created different overall impressions.
  • The Division treated the sector as transportable buildings intended for sauna use, counted visible interior, colours and materials in the comparison, excluded D5 under the grace period and D10-D11 for unproven disclosure.
  • It found each remaining prior design produced a different overall impression and that D1-D4 also did not destroy novelty, so the invalidity application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberCarlos MATEO PÉREZ

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

25.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130245

vs G.B.S., s.r.o.

2026-01-20Art 25(1)(b)257
000130202

vs SC PAMABA SRL

2025-12-16Art 25(1)(b)257
000127997

vs Peng Zhang

2025-12-15Art 25(1)(b)257
000127959

vs Peng Zhang

2025-12-15Art 25(1)(b)257
000127935

vs Saunasell OÜ

2025-11-07Art 25(1)(b)257
000127898

vs Saunasell OÜ

2025-10-20Art 25(1)(b)257
000124782

vs D.ELLINAS FACTORY PRODUCTS LTD

2025-06-25Art 25(1)(b)257
000124781

vs D.ELLINAS FACTORY PRODUCTS LTD

2025-06-25Art 25(1)(b)257