Preliminary questions on the extent of the necessary disclosure prior to the registration of an Unregistered Community Design and the determination of the date for assessing the novelty of a design

Print this page 15-11-2019
IP10235

Case C-728/19: Beverly Hills Teddy Bear v PMS International Group PLC. High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) - United Kingdom.

 

Design Law. Preliminary reference on the interpretation of Articles 5(1)(a), 7(1) and 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 6/2002 of 12 December 2001.

 

Preliminary questions:

"1. For the protection of an unregistered Community design to come into being under art.11 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 6/2002 of 12 December 2001 (‘the Regulation’), by the design being made available to the public within the meaning of art.11(1), must an event of disclosure, within the meaning of art.11(2), take place within the geographical confines of the Community, or is it sufficient that the event, wherever it took place, was such that, in the normal course of business, the event could reasonably have become known to the circles specialised in the sector concerned, operating within the Community (assuming the design was not disclosed in confidence within the terms of the final sentence of art.11(2))?


2. Is the date for assessing the novelty of a design for which unregistered Community design protection is claimed, within the meaning of art.5(l)(a) of the Regulation, the date on which the unregistered Community design protection for the design came into being according to art.11 of the Regulation, or alternatively the date on which the relevant event of disclosure of the design, within the meaning of art.7(1) of the Regulation, could reasonably have become known in the normal course of business to the circles specialised in the sector concerned, operating within the Community (assuming that the design was not disclosed in confidence within the terms of the final sentence of art.7(1)), or alternatively some other, and if so, which date?"

 

Read more here.