Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 7 February 2019 –  
Eglo Leuchten v EUIPO — Di-Ka (Lamp)

(Case T‑766/17)

(Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing lighting apparatus — Ground for invalidity — Prior design — Individual character — Informed user — Degree of freedom of the designer — Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

| 1. | Community designs — Grounds for invalidity — No individual character — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the prior design — Global assessment of all the elements of the prior design  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1)(b) and 25(1)(b))  (see paras 20, 21, 47) |

| 2. | Community designs — Grounds for invalidity — Conflict with a prior design — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the prior design — Informed user — Concept  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1)(b), 10(1) and 25(1)(b))  (see para. 22) |

| 3. | Community designs — Grounds for invalidity — Conflict with a prior design — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the prior design — Criteria for assessment — Designer’s freedom  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(2) and 25(1)(b))  (see paras 25, 26, 49) |

| 4. | Community designs — Grounds for invalidity — No individual character — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the prior design — Saturation of the state of the art — Relevance  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b))  (see para. 29) |

| 5. | Community designs — Grounds for invalidity — No individual character — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the prior design — General tendency in design matters — Irrelevant  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1)(b) and 25(1)(b))  (see para. 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 prior design — Representation of lighting apparatus  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1)(b) and 25(1)(b))  (see paras 34, 35, 38-42, 44) |

| 7. | Community designs — Grounds for invalidity — No individual character — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the prior design — Determination of the overall impression having regard to the manner of use of the product  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1)(b) and 25(1)(b))  (see para. 43) |

| 8. | Community designs — Grounds for invalidity — No individual character — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the prior design — Determination of the overall impression in relation to one or more prior designs, taken individually  (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1)(b) and 25(1)(b))  (see para. 57) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 September 2017 (Case R 738/2016-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Eglo Leuchten and Di-Ka Vertriebs.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Eglo Leuchten GmbH to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)