62023TJ1158_INF
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.