Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 5 July 2017.Gamet S.A. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a door handle — Earlier design — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Degree of freedom of the designer — No different overall impression — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Evidence submitted in support of the opposition after the expiry of the prescribed period — Production of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Discretion of the Board of Appeal — Article 63 of Regulation No 6/2002.Case T-306/16.

Judgment // 05/07/2017 // 2 min read
bookmark 28 citations

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 5 July 2017 —Gamet v EUIPO — ‘Metal-Bud II’ Robert Gubała (Door handle)

(Case T‑306/16)

(Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a door handle — Earlier design — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Degree of freedom of the designer — No different overall impression — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Evidence submitted in support of the opposition after the expiry of the prescribed period — Production of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Discretion of the Board of Appeal — Article 63 of Regulation No 6/2002)

  1. Community designs — Procedural provisions — Examination of the facts of the Office’s own motion — Facts and evidence not submitted in time — Account taken — Power of assessment of the Office

(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Art. 63(2))

(see paras 14-17)

  1. Community designs — Procedural provisions — Examination of the facts of the Office’s own motion — Action for invalidity — Examination restricted to the submissions of the parties

(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Art. 63(1))

(see para. 31)

  1. Community designs — Ground 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 prior design

(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1), and 25(1)(b))

(see paras 38, 39)

  1. Community designs — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Informed user — Definition

(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1), and 25(1)(b))

(see para. 40)

  1. Community designs — Ground 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 door handle

(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1), and 25(1)(b))

(see paras 41, 47, 49, 50, 55)

  1. Community designs — Ground 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 — Creative licence

(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(2), and 25(1)(b))

(see paras 43, 44)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 March 2016 (Case R 2040/2014-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Firma produkcyjno-handlowa ‘Metal-Bud II’ Robert Gubała and Gamet.

Operative part

The Court:

  1. Dismisses the action;

  2. Orders Gamet S.A. to pay the costs.

Designs