- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-112/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 25 February 2021 — X BV v Classic Coach Company vof, Y, Z
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CN0112
62021CN0112
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
17.5.2021
Official Journal of the European Union
C 189/10
(Case C-112/21)
(2021/C 189/11)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: X BV
Respondents: Classic Coach Company vof, Y, Z
Questions referred
1.For the purposes of determining whether there is an ‘earlier right’ of a third party as referred to in Article 6(2) of the repealed Directive 2008/95/EC (1)
(a)is it sufficient that, prior to the filing of the trade mark, that third party had made use in the course of trade of a right which is recognised by the laws of the Member State in question; or
(b)is there a requirement that that third party, on the basis of that earlier right, under the applicable national legislation, is entitled to prohibit the use of the trade mark by the trade mark holder?
2.In answering Question 1, is it also relevant whether the trade mark holder has an even earlier right (recognised by the laws of the Member State in question) in relation to the sign registered as a trade mark and, if so, is it relevant whether the trade mark holder may, on the basis of that even earlier recognised right, prohibit the use by the third party of the alleged ‘earlier right’?
Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (OJ 2008 L 299, p. 25).