In the judgment of 24 January 2024 in T‑537/22, the General Court (GC) held that a registered Community design for a building block of a modular system was valid. The GC affirmed the Board of Appeal’s decision which found that even if all the features of appearance of the product concerned by the contested design were solely dictated by the technical function of that product, within the meaning of Article 8(1) of the Community Design Regulation, the contested design could not be declared invalid as it fell within the exception protecting modular systems referred to in Article 8(3) of the Community Design Regulation (points 16 and 74 et seq. of T-537/22).
This judgment of the GC is the second judgment relating to the invalidity proceedings, with the GC highlighting the importance of Art. 8(3) of the Community Design Regulation in T-515/19. The recent judgment T-537/22 confirms (a) that registered designs can be powerful intellectual property assets, and (b) that Article 8(3) of the Community Design Regulation provides an exception of great practical importance applicable to various kinds of modular systems (and not only vehicle repair parts). This is in line with recital (11) of the Community Design Regulation which stipulates that “mechanical fittings of modular products may nevertheless constitute an important element of the innovative characteristics of modular products and present a major marketing asset, and therefore should be eligible for protection.”