Fashion and Creative Freedom in EU Design Law:

The CJEU’s Position on Deity Shoes

The CJEU Judgment on December 18, 2025, Case C-323/24 (Deity Shoes)

The judgment of Case C-323/24 (Deity Shoes), delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Union on December 18, 2025, resolves several key questions regarding the requirements of protection for Community designs under Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 and has particular impact on the footwear and fashion sectors.

The dispute arose from an infringement claim on Community designs for footwear and a counterclaim requesting invalidity that alleged that the protected designs were limited to a minimal combining or customizing of designs included in the catalogues of trading undertakings and which followed known fashion trends without a relevant creative contribution from the owner of the design.

A Spanish court asked the CJEU whether genuine design activity, a minimum degree of creativity, or significant customization was required for the design to enjoy protection in this context, and how fashion trends should be assessed for the purposes of individual character.

No requirement of minimum creativity

The Court expressly affirms that Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 does not require the accreditation of a minimum degree of design, creativity, or intellectual effort, in addition to novelty and individual character, on the part of the designer.

The protection of the Community design is based exclusively on the appearance of the product and the overall impression it makes on the informed user, not on the creative process undertaken, nor on the greater or lesser subjective originality of the designer. Consequently, it is not feasible to introduce criteria that is specific to copyright into the field of design law by way of interpretation.

The CJEU also specifies that the term “designer,” as utilized in Article 14 of the Regulation, fulfills only an attributive function of the design rights without introducing additional requirements to access protection.

Catalogue-based designs and individual character

The Court held that the fact that a design is based on catalogue models offered by suppliers, and that the modifications introduced are specific, does not exclude in and of itself the individual character within the meaning of Article 6 of the Regulation.

The assessment of individual character requires a comparison of the overall impression produced by the contested design along with the impressions produced by each earlier, individual design, and not by analyzing the origin of the components nor the degree of creative intervention of the owner. A design can be composed of already-existing elements and yet produce a different overall impression on the informed user.

Fashion trends and a designer´s freedom

The Court specifically addresses the relevance of fashion trends in the analysis of individual character. It rejects the idea that they can be considered a limiting factor on the designer’s freedom when compared to technical or regulatory restrictions.

Unlike these restrictions, fashion trends are not inevitable or permanent. They are changing and evolving, and do not prevent the designer from departing from them or innovating within their framework.

As such, the fact that a design follows a fashion trend does not lower the threshold for individual character, nor does it justify that minor differences are sufficient to generate a different overall impression. In addition, elements derived from fashion trends cannot receive less weight in the assessment of the general overall impression made on an informed user.

In conclusion, the Court of Justice establishes that there is no minimum creativity requirement in Community design law, that the limited customization of catalogue models does not exclude protection, and that fashion trends do not reduce the freedom of the designer nor the relevance of the trends in the overall general impression. This judgment thus consolidates an objective, functional interpretation that is particularly relevant for the fashion, footwear, and mass industrial production sectors, where formal standardization is commonplace.

Link to the resolution: click here

January 14, 2026