Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 20 November 2024 –  
Lidl Digital International v EUIPO – Ningbo Hanyuan Lighting (Lamp)

(Case T‑464/23) (
[1](#t-ECR_62023TJ0464_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing a lamp – Grounds for invalidity – Individual character – Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Duty to state reasons – Article 62 of Regulation No 6/2002)

| 1. | 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 paragraphs 17, 18) |

| 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 – Global assessment of all the elements of the earlier design  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 21, 47, 48, 55, 63, 64, 69) |

| 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 – Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b))  (see paragraph 29) |

| 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 – Criteria for assessment – Sector concerned  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6, 25(1)(b) and 36(2))  (see paragraph 30) |

| 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 31, 32) |

| 6. | 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 35, 36, 42) |

| 7. | 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 lamp  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 45, 46, 60, 66-68, 72-75, 86-88, 97, 107, 115, 125) |

| 8. | Community designs – Requirements for protection – Designs dictated by their technical function – Features of appearance of a product which are dictated solely by its technical function – Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Art. 8(1))  (see paragraphs 58, 59) |

| 9. | Community designs – Surrender and invalidity – Application for a declaration of invalidity based on the existence of an earlier design – Burden of proof  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 4 to 9 and 25(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 61, 62) |

| 10. | Community designs – Requirements for protection – Design constituting a component part of a complex product – Component part having to remain visible during normal use of the product in order to be regarded as new and individual in character  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 3(c) and 4(2) and (3))  (see paragraph 71) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Lidl Digital International GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62023TJ0464_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 329, 18.9.2023](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2023:329:TOC).

[Top](#document1)