EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-237/19: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria — Hungary) — Gömböc Kutató, Szolgáltató és Kereskedelmi Kft. v Szellemi Tulajdon Nemzeti Hivatala (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Trade marks — Directive 2008/95/EC — Refusal or invalidation of registration — Three-dimensional mark — Article 3(1)(e)(ii) and (iii) — Sign consisting exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result — Sign consisting of the shape which gives substantial value to the goods — Consideration of the perception of the relevant public)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CA0237

62019CA0237

April 23, 2020
With Google you find a lot.
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

13.7.2020

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/12

(Case C-237/19) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Trade marks - Directive 2008/95/EC - Refusal or invalidation of registration - Three-dimensional mark - Article 3(1)(e)(ii) and (iii) - Sign consisting exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result - Sign consisting of the shape which gives substantial value to the goods - Consideration of the perception of the relevant public)

(2020/C 230/16)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Gömböc Kutató, Szolgáltató és Kereskedelmi Kft.

Respondent: Szellemi Tulajdon Nemzeti Hivatala

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 3(1)(e)(ii) of Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to establish whether a sign consists exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result, assessment does not have to be limited to the graphic representation of that sign. Information other than that relating to the graphic representation alone, such as the perception of the relevant public, may be used in order to identify the essential characteristics of the sign at issue. However, while information which is not apparent from the graphic representation of the sign may be taken into consideration in order to establish whether those characteristics perform a technical function of the goods in question, such information must originate from objective and reliable sources and may not include the perception of the relevant public;

2.Article 3(1)(e)(iii) of Directive 2008/95 must be interpreted as meaning that the perception or knowledge of the relevant public as regards the product represented graphically by a sign that consists exclusively of the shape of that product may be taken into consideration in order to identify an essential characteristic of that shape. The ground for refusal set out in that provision may be applied if it is apparent from objective and reliable evidence that the consumer’s decision to purchase the product in question is to a large extent determined by that characteristic;

3.Article 3(1)(e)(iii) of Directive 2008/95 must be interpreted as meaning that the ground for refusal of registration provided for in that provision must not be applied systematically to a sign which consists exclusively of the shape of the goods where that sign enjoys protection under the law relating to designs or where the sign consists exclusively of the shape of a decorative item.

Language of the case: Hungarian.

ECLI:EU:C:2020:140

* * *

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia