Praesidiad Holding BVBA & Anor v Zaun Limited

Praesidiad Holding BVBA & Anor v Zaun Limited

Article 86(5) of the Community Designs Regulation continues to apply to the pending infringement action by virtue of the direct effect of Article 67(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement, precluding Zaun from counterclaiming for invalidity. Alternatively, common law principles of res judicata also preclude Zaun from...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: PRAESIDIAD HOLDING BVBA; Claimant: GUARDIAR EUROPE BVBA; Defendant: ZAUN LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Infringement and Invalidity / Judgment on Application to Strike Out Counterclaim
Outcome
Zaun's counterclaim seeking a declaration of invalidity of the RCD and the Re-registered Design is struck out.
Legal Topics
Registered Community Design, Re Registered UK Design, Res Judicata, Brexit Transitional Provisions, Jurisdiction, Statutory Interpretation
Intellectual Property EU Law UK Law Registered Community Design Re Registered UK Design Res Judicata Brexit Transitional Provisions Jurisdiction +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PRAESIDIAD HOLDING BVBA

Claimant

GUARDIAR EUROPE BVBA

Claimant

ZAUN LIMITED

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Infringement and Invalidity / Judgment on Application to Strike Out Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Zaun is precluded from challenging the validity of the RCD and Re-registered Design due to Article 86(5) and/or English law principles of res judicata
  2. 2 Whether Article 86(5) continues to apply post-Brexit under the Withdrawal Agreement
  3. 3 Whether the EUIPO is a court of competent jurisdiction for res judicata purposes

Ratio Decidendi

Article 86(5) of the Community Designs Regulation continues to apply to the pending infringement action by virtue of the direct effect of Article 67(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement, precluding Zaun from counterclaiming for invalidity. Alternatively, common law principles of res judicata also preclude Zaun from re-litigating invalidity, as the EUIPO is a tribunal of competent jurisdiction and the issues have been finally determined.

Court Disposition

Zaun's counterclaim seeking a declaration of invalidity of the RCD and the Re-registered Design is struck out.

Orders

  • Counterclaim struck out
  • RCD and Re-registered Design validity challenge barred