Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62021TJ0535

    Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 March 2023.
    Tinnus Enterprises LLC v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
    Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing fluid distribution equipment – Ground for invalidity – Non-compliance with requirements for protection – Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Features of appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function – Article 8(1) of Regulation No 6/2002.
    Case T-535/21.

    Court reports – general – 'Information on unpublished decisions' section

    ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2023:175

     Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 March 2023 –
    Tinnus Enterprises v EUIPO – Mystic Products (Fluid distribution equipment)

    (Case T‑535/21) ( 1 )

    (Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing fluid distribution equipment – Ground for invalidity – Non-compliance with requirements for protection – Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Features of appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function – Article 8(1) of Regulation No 6/2002)

    1. 

    Community designs – Grounds for invalidity – Designs dictated by their technical function – Features of appearance of a product which are dictated solely by its technical function – Criteria for assessment – Taking into account the relevant objective circumstances

    (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 8(1) and 25(1)(b))

    (see paragraphs 24-27, 57)

    2. 

    Community designs – Grounds for invalidity – Designs dictated by their technical function – Representation of fluid distribution equipment

    (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 8(1) and 25(1)(b))

    (see paragraphs 34-42, 48, 67, 72, 82, 93)

    3. 

    Community designs – Surrender and invalidity – Application for a declaration of invalidity – Examination of the application – Designs dictated by their technical function – Burden of proof

    (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 8(1) and 25(1)(b))

    (see paragraph 49)

    4. 

    Community designs – Grounds for invalidity – Designs dictated by their technical function – Features of appearance of a product which are dictated solely by its technical function – Criteria for assessment – Existence of alternative designs – Irrelevant

    (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 8(1) and 25(1)(b))

    (see paragraph 83)

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1. 

    Dismisses the action;

    2. 

    Orders Tinnus Enterprises LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).


    ( 1 ) OJ C 431, 25.10.2021.

    Top