EU design reform: Phase II

Where this fits in the EU framework

The EU-wide design system is built upon the foundational Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002, which was heavily amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/2822 in Phase I of the current reform. Alongside 6/2002 sits Directive (EU) 2024/2823, which deals with national design laws in the Member States rather than the EU-wide right itself.

The two new 2026 Regulations are Commission secondary legislation, which sits underneath the basic Regulation. The Delegated Regulation 2026/137 supplements the main law with more detailed procedural rules, while the Implementing Regulation 2026/138 lays down the administrative detail needed for uniform application. In other words, the Phase I legislation in 2024 did the bulk of the substantive reform, while this new Phase II legislation tells the EUIPO how to implement it.

1. New types of representations

One of the biggest points of practical interest is the acceptance of new types of design representation. The old law was highly prescriptive on the types and form of the graphic or photographic reproductions permitted, while explicitly limiting a design to no more than seven different views. The new implementing regulation instead says that the representation can be static, dynamic, or animated, using generally available technology including drawings, photographs, videos, computer imaging and computer modelling. It also says that the protected subject matter is determined by the visual features of all views or reproductions combined.

This will have wide ranging consequences for how we depict and interpret designs in Europe. For designs involving screens, transitions, animations, digital interfaces or other moving visual matter, the law is now finally catching up with the reality of these products. Of particular interest too, is the mention of “computer imaging or computer modelling” as potential representation types, although we will need to await updated EUIPO guidelines to understand exactly how and to what extent CAD models might be permitted to function as representations.

More generally, the explicit focus on the combined effect of all views means applicants need to think earlier and more carefully about what they show, what they leave out, and what they disclaim.

For dynamic or animated designs in particular, prepare the filing visuals more carefully before filing: decide which states, transitions, and exclusions are to be shown, and how you are going to show them in the new file formats.

2. Still no clarity on the allowed number of views

The old seven view cap was a hard legal rule, which has been repealed by the new legislation. Importantly, it is almost certain that the number of static views will still be limited, but the exact number will be set by the EUIPO directly through their Design Guidelines to be published in July 2026. Current working assumptions suggest the new limit may be at least 10 static views per design, which will be welcome news for many applicants and in particular our US colleagues, whose system provides a more comprehensive filing of views.

For now, the sensible approach is to prepare for a more flexible regime, while still being disciplined about only including views that genuinely matter in defining the design.

3. The ability to ‘fix’ representations

This may well end up being the most useful practical change in the package. Under the old rules, only the applicant’s name and address, errors of wording or copying, or obvious mistakes could be corrected, and only if the correction did not change the representation of the design. This was highly restrictive, often painfully so: in practice, minor inconsistencies in the views could be very difficult to cure, and applicants were often forced into unattractive workarounds, including deleting views.

On the face of it, the new regime seems to be more forgiving, permitting alteration of an application or a registration in “immaterial details”. The extent of what counts as “immaterial” will have to be tested, however the hope is these provisions should help applicants where a design contains some minor inconsistency or defect in the views. Of course this will not provide free rein to redraw a weak filing into a strong one after the fact, but it should reduce the number of cases in which a registration is undermined by a small defect or artefact that wasn’t spotted before filing.

For filing strategy, this doesn’t mean a lower bar for representations Of course the best strategy remains to get the representations right at the outset. However, where a defect is genuinely immaterial to the design, the available solutions should now be more forgiving and pragmatic.

4. Invalidity actions become more front-loaded

The other genuinely important practical point concerns invalidity. The new Delegated Regulation 2026/137 requires an invalidity applicant to include a reasoned statement setting out the facts, evidence and arguments in support of the grounds invoked. It also contains more specific evidential requirements depending on the ground relied upon. Where a novelty or individual-character challenge is not contested by the holder, the Office is obliged to rule on invalidity as a matter of priority.

That matters for both sides. For attackers, invalidity actions are becoming less of a placeholder exercise and more of a fully pleaded case from day one. For holders, this should make weak or speculative attacks less comfortable. From an enforcement point of view, that slightly increases the premium on having your prior art, disclosure story and supporting evidence in good order before a dispute starts. It also means that a party planning to attack a registration should prepare the case properly at the outset rather than assuming that the detail can always be filled in later.

Given the above, it may be prudent to keep dated evidence of creation, disclosure, launch and use, including reliable web evidence, so that these are all immediately to hand should they be needed – do not assume an invalidity fight will proceed slowly.

5. Transitional provisions

There will be a transitional period. The new Regulations apply from 1 July 2026, but they preserve parts of the old regime for certain earlier matters. That means timing may still matter for some applications, corrections, evidential steps and proceedings that straddle the changeover. Anyone planning a significant filing programme or a contested action around that date should check carefully which regime will actually apply.

For dynamic or animated designs in particular, choose filing timing deliberately: if you want the benefit of dynamic/animated representation, waiting until the new rules apply may be in your interest.