Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2025:250
Date: 2025-03-12
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Intellectual, industrial and commercial property;Designs
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Denmark

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 12 March 2025 – deluxe holding v EUIPO – Piffany Copenhagen (Electric candles) (Case T‑1158/23) ( Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing electric candles – Ground for invalidity – Lack of individual character – Degree of freedom of the designer – No different overall impression – Articles 4 and 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Rights of the defence – Scope of the examination carried out by the Board of Appeal ) 1. Community designs – Appeals procedure – Appeal brought against a decision taken by a department of EUIPO – Examination by the Board of Appeal – Scope (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Art. 60(1)) (see paragraphs 16-20) 2. Community designs – Grounds for invalidity – No individual character – Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design – Criteria for assessment – Freedom of the designer (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(2) and 25(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 32, 33, 35, 37, 39) 3. Community designs – Grounds for invalidity – No individual character – Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design – Representation of electric candles (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 36, 38, 40, 54-56, 61, 62, 64-66) 4. Community designs – Grounds for invalidity – No individual character – Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design – Global assessment of all the elements of the earlier design (Council Regulation No 6/2002, recital 14 and Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 51, 52, 57-59, 63) 5. Community designs – Grounds for invalidity – No individual character – Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design – Informed user – Concept (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 53, 55) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders deluxe holding ApS to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Piffany Copenhagen ApS.