Invalidity · first instance · 2026-04-29
000129661
Contested design: 009011992-0003
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered EU design No 009011992-0003 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
Robitsvia PDF extraction
Belgium (BE)
Kortrijk, Belgium
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Squar3D Aps
Denmark (DK)
Hadsten, Denmark
Represented by
Niels Uth
Prior art cited (3)
Printout of article titled "TOY^2 Track Connectors Review" with pictures of earlier Toy^2 track connectors.
https://legebyen.dk · legebyen.dk · disclosed 2021-03-10
English printout of article titled "TOY^2 Track Connectors Review" with the same pictures as Annex 2.
https://legebyen.dk · legebyen.dk · disclosed 2021-03-10
Wayback Machine printout of the holder website showing pictures of Toy^2 track connectors.
https://squar3d.dk · Wayback Machine · disclosed 2020-11-18
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that all visible features of the contested connector were solely dictated by technical function and mechanical interconnection, and that earlier online disclosures also destroyed novelty and individual character.
- ›The holder replied that the specific appearance reflected design freedom and aesthetic choices, that alternative connector shapes existed, and that the applicant had not properly proved either technical exclusion or qualifying prior designs.
- ›The Division found the product formed part of a modular system, so Article 8(3) EUDR could preserve protection without deciding whether Article 8(1) or 8(2) otherwise applied.
- ›The Division also held the prior art case was unsubstantiated because the applicant did not identify and comment on specific earlier designs separately, so disclosure under Articles 5 to 7 was not properly proved.
- ›The application was rejected in full and the applicant was ordered to bear the holder's fixed representation costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
- MemberEmmanuel COLLIN
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000130341 vs Mortensen Software Consulting ApS | 2026-05-27 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000129371 vs joboo GmbH | 2026-05-05 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000129624 vs Squar3D Aps | 2026-04-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000129621 vs Squar3D Aps | 2026-04-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000130709 vs Shantou Chenghai district Shuangjia plastic toy factory | 2026-02-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000128937 vs Liyou Industrial Co., Ltd | 2026-02-24 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000130683 vs Shengzhi Jiang | 2026-02-23 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000130684 vs Shengzhi Jiang | 2026-02-23 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |