Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 October 2020 –  
Dvectis CZ v EUIPO – Yado (Support pillow)

(Case T‑818/19)

(Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered community design representing a support pillow – Earlier Community design – Ground for invalidity – No individual character – Informed user – Degree of freedom of the designer – No different overall impression – Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Obligation to state reasons)

| 1. | 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 and 25(1)(b))  (see paras 21, 46, 47) |

| 2. | Community designs – Application for registration – Conditions – Indication of the goods  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Art. 36(2) and (6))  (see paras 30, 31) |

| 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 a support pillow  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b))  (see paras 40, 44, 52, 67-69) |

| 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 – Informed user – Definition  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b))  (see paras 41, 42) |

| 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 – Global assessment of all the elements of the earlier design  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b))  (see paras 54-56, 61, 62) |

| 6. | Community designs – Procedural provisions – Statement of reasons for decisions – First sentence of Article 62 of Regulation No 6/2002 – Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU  (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 6/2002, Art. 62, first sentence)  (see paras 73, 75) |

| 7. | Community designs – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Decision of an EUIPO body forming part of the context of the decision of the Board of Appeal  (see para. 78) |

| 8. | Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Plea based on absence or inadequacy of the statement of reasons – Plea alleging incorrectness of the statement of reasons – Distinction  (Art. 296 TFEU)  (see para. 81) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 September 2019 (Case R 513/2018-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Yado and Dvectis CZ.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Dvectis CZ s. r. o. to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)