Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/137 of 15 January 2026 supplementing Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 on European Union designs with rules specifying the details of certain proceedings concerning registered designs, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2245/2002

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 of 12 December 2001 on European Union designs (1), and in particular Article 47b, Article 53a, Article 55a, Article 64a, Article 65a, Article 66a, Article 66d, Article 66f, Article 66i, Article 67c, Article 78a and Article -106a thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 created a system specific to the Union for the protection of designs to be obtained at the level of the Union on the basis of an application to the European Union Intellectual Property Office (‘the Office’).

(2) Regulation (EU) 2024/2822 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) amended Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 by aligning the powers conferred upon the Commission with Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In order to conform with the new legal framework resulting from that alignment, certain rules are to be adopted by means of implementing and delegated acts. Those new rules should replace the current rules laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2245/2002 (3). Regulation (EC) No 2245/2002 should therefore be repealed.

(3) The Office is responsible for the registration of both the EU trade mark and the registered EU design. Therefore, in the interest of legal certainty, consistency and simplification, the rules to be adopted by means of this Regulation should be aligned to the extent possible with the rules applicable to EU trade marks as laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 (4).

(4) The examination and registration of EU design applications should be carried out in an effective, efficient and expeditious manner, using procedures which are transparent, thorough, fair and equitable. In the interest of clarity and legal certainty, it is necessary to clearly specify the details on the procedure for amending an EU design application in immaterial details, either to remedy a deficiency or on the applicant’s own motion. While following the provisions governing the amendment of EU trade marks, that regime should be adapted to the particularities of design representations to facilitate the filing process for designs.

(5) The procedural provisions governing the declaration of invalidity of a registered EU design should ensure that a registered EU design can be declared invalid in an effective and efficient way by means of a transparent, thorough, fair and equitable procedure. For the sake of greater legal certainty, clarity and consistency, it is appropriate to align, to the extent possible, the procedural provisions with those applicable to EU trade mark invalidity proceedings. To this effect, it is appropriate to clearly specify both the content that should form part of any application for invalidity and the specific content requirements depending on the invoked ground for invalidity. With a view to reducing administrative burden, the provisions of this Regulation should also include the requirements for the substantiation of earlier rights in cases where the content of the relevant evidence is accessible online from a source recognised by the Office. It is further necessary to confirm the current practice of the Office in relation to requests for proof of use when the application for declaration of invalidity is based on an earlier trade mark.

(6) As a countermeasure to the limited substantive examination of EU design applications before registration and in order to facilitate the efficient invalidation of unlawfully registered EU designs, an accelerated invalidity procedure should be made available for cases where the holder of the registered EU design does not contest the grounds of invalidity or the relief sought.

(7) In order to ensure an effective, efficient and complete review of decisions taken by the Office in the first instance by means of a transparent, thorough, fair and equitable appeal procedure suited to the specific nature of intellectual property law, it is appropriate to reinforce legal certainty, predictability and consistency of the legal framework by applying the existing procedural provisions for EU trade marks in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625. The relevant provisions of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 should also apply when it comes to ensuring an effective and efficient organisation of the Boards of Appeal in the area of EU designs.

(8) For reasons of legal certainty and consistency, and in order to ensure a smooth, effective and efficient operation of the EU design system, it is further appropriate to apply the existing procedural provisions for EU trade marks in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 in relation to the requirements as to the details on oral proceedings and the detailed arrangements for taking of evidence, certain provisions concerning notifications by the Office and communications to the Office, the rules governing the calculation, duration and extension of time limits, the detailed arrangements for the resumption of proceedings after their interruption, and the details on representation before the Office in design matters.

(9) In order to modernise the EU design system, it is further appropriate to provide for both notifications by and communications to the Office by electronic means as the only means of notification and communication. In the interest of efficiency, it should be permissible for the Office to effect the transmission of documents to parties concerned by providing electronic access to those documents. Furthermore, for reasons of efficiency, transparency and user-friendliness, the Office should make available online the electronic forms in all the official languages of the Union for communication in proceedings before the Office.

(10) The rules laid down in this Regulation supplement provisions of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 that have been amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/2822 with effect from 1 July 2026. It is therefore necessary that this Regulation becomes applicable on the same date.

(11) Notwithstanding the repeal of Regulation (EC) No 2245/2002, it is necessary to continue to apply specific provisions of that Regulation to certain proceedings that had been initiated before the abovementioned date until the conclusion of those proceedings,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Amendment of the application

(a) the file number of the application;

(b) the name and the address of the applicant in accordance with Article 1(1), point (a), and Article 1(2) of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/138 (5);

(c) an indication of the features to be amended and of the view or views to be amended or withdrawn;

(d) a representation of the design as amended, in accordance with Article 2 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/138.

Article 2

Application for a declaration of invalidity

(a) the registration number of the registered EU design in respect of which the declaration of invalidity is sought and the name of its holder;

(b) an indication of the grounds as laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 on which the invalidity application is based;

(c) a reasoned statement setting out the facts, evidence and arguments in support of the grounds for invalidity invoked;

(d) the supporting evidence referred to in point (c);

(e) the identification of the applicant for a declaration of invalidity in accordance with Article 1(1), point (a), and Article 1(2) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/138 and, where applicable, the identification of the appointed representative in accordance with Article 1(1), point (c), and Article 1(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/138;

(f) an indication concerning the authorisation or entitlement to file the application for a declaration of invalidity pursuant to Article 25(2) to (6) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 and supporting evidence.

(a) where the ground laid down in Article 25(1), point (b), in conjunction with Articles 5 and 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 is invoked, the indication and evidence of disclosure of the prior design(s) under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;

(b) where the ground laid down in Article 25(1), point (c), of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 is invoked, a final decision of the competent court or authority of the Member State concerned regarding the entitlement to the EU design under Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;

(c) where the ground laid down in Article 25(1), point (d), of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 is invoked, the representation and particulars identifying the prior design, accompanied, when it is not a registered EU design, by evidence of its filing or registration, consisting of a copy of the relevant filing, registration, and, if applicable, the renewal certificate or an equivalent document from the administration with which the design was filed or registered proving the existence and validity;

(f) where the ground laid down in Article 25(1), point (g), of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 is invoked, the representation and particulars of the relevant item as referred to in that Article.

Article 3

Languages used in invalidity proceedings

Parties to the invalidity proceedings may inform the Office before the expiry of a period of two months of receipt by the holder of the communication referred to in Article 6(1) of this Regulation, that a different language of proceedings has been agreed pursuant to Article 98(5) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002. Where the application has not been filed in that language, the holder may request that the applicant file a translation of the application in that language. Such a request shall be received by the Office before the expiry of the period of two months of receipt by the registered EU design holder of the communication referred to in Article 6(1) of this Regulation. The Office shall specify a time limit for the applicant to file such a translation. Where that translation is not filed or it is filed late, the language of the proceedings shall remain unchanged.

Article 4

Information to the parties concerning an application for a declaration of invalidity

An application for a declaration of invalidity and any document submitted by the applicant, as well as any communication addressed to one of the parties by the Office prior to the finding on admissibility, shall be sent by the Office to the other party for the purposes of informing of the introduction of an application for a declaration of invalidity.

Article 5

Admissibility of an application for a declaration of invalidity

Article 6

Examination of the application for a declaration of invalidity

Article 7

Examination of proceedings before the Invalidity Division as a matter of priority

Where the application for a declaration of invalidity is based on Article 25(1), point (b), of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002, in conjunction with Articles 5 and 6 of that Regulation, and the holder of the contested registered EU design has not contested the grounds of invalidity or the relief sought, the Office shall rule on the invalidity as a matter of priority.

Article 8

Multiple applications for a declaration of invalidity