The OHIM does not carry out search for earlier designs and does not examine the earlier rights during the registration procedure of Community Design. Since existence of earlier right or earlier identical unregistered design anywhere in the world may be the ground for refusal, the holder of the earlier right may invalid the registration. Applications for invalidity may be made to the OHIM by any person. The procedure is inter-partes: it happens between the holder and the opposing party who requires the invalidation of the registered design. The invalidity division of the OHIM organises the procedure and when they consider that the submissions and evidence provided is sufficient, they render a decision on the case. Please note that not only the application of invalidation but also the argumentation and evidences must be filed at the same time. Therefore we can only forward the invalidation application if we have received the evidences in 3 copies.

The following considered as a ground of invalidation:

1. an earlier RCD application or design;
2. an earlier design application or design in a member state;
3. any identical design which has been disclosed anywhere in the world,
   • please note that the owner is entitled 12 months grace period for submitting a design application;
4. is not a design;
5. does not meet other legal requirements.

   A Community design may be declared invalid only in the following cases:

   1. If the design does not correspond to the definition of design which reads that 'design' means the appearance of the whole or a part of a product resulting from the features of, in particular, the lines, contours, colors, shape, texture and/or materials of the product itself and/or its ornamentation
   2. If the design does not fulfill the requirements of protection that is if the design
      • is not new, or
      • has no individual character, or
      • is not disclosed, or
      • subsists in features of appearance of a product which are solely dictated by its technical function, or
      • is contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality.
   3. If, by virtue of a court decision, the right holder is not entitled to the Community design.
      • A. The right to the Community design vests in the designer or his successor in title.
      • B. If two or more persons have jointly developed a design, the right to the Community design vests in them jointly.
      • C. If a design is developed by an employee in the execution of his duties or following the instructions given by his employer, the right to the Community design vests in the employer, unless otherwise agreed or specified under national law.
   4. If the Community design is in conflict with a prior design which has been made available to the public after the date of filing of the application or, if a priority is claimed, the date of priority of the Community design, and which is protected from a date prior to the said date by a registered Community design or an application for such a design, or by a registered design right of a Member State, or by an application for such a right;
   5. If a distinctive sign is used in a subsequent design, and Community law or the law of the Member State governing that sign confers on the right holder of the sign the right to prohibit such use;
   6. If the design constitutes an unauthorized use of a work protected under the copyright law of a Member State;
   7. If the design constitutes an improper use of any of the items listed in Article 6ter of the 'Paris Convention' for the Protection of Industrial Property or of badges, emblems and escutcheons other than those covered by the said Article 6ter and which are of particular public interest in a Member State.