# C_2008037EN.01001301.xml

| 9.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 28 November 2007 — Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG v Franz Hauswirth GmbH

(Case C-529/07)

(2008/C 37/17)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG

Applicant:

Defendant: Franz Hauswirth GmbH

Defendant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 51(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (1) to be interpreted as meaning that an applicant for a Community trade mark is to be regarded as acting in bad faith where he knows, at the time of his application, that a competitor in (at least) one Member State is using the same sign, or one so similar as to be capable of being confused with it, for the same or similar goods or services, and he applies for the trade mark in order to be able to prevent that competitor from continuing to use the sign? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 51(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (1) to be interpreted as meaning that an applicant for a Community trade mark is to be regarded as acting in bad faith where he knows, at the time of his application, that a competitor in (at least) one Member State is using the same sign, or one so similar as to be capable of being confused with it, for the same or similar goods or services, and he applies for the trade mark in order to be able to prevent that competitor from continuing to use the sign?

1

| 2. | If the first question is answered in the negative:
  Is the applicant to be regarded as acting in bad faith if he applies for the trade mark in order to be able to prevent a competitor from continuing to use the sign, where, at the time he files his application, he knows or ought to know that by using an identical or similar sign for the same goods or services, or goods or services which are so similar as to be capable of being confused, the competitor has already acquired ‘valuable property rights’? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the first question is answered in the negative:

Is the applicant to be regarded as acting in bad faith if he applies for the trade mark in order to be able to prevent a competitor from continuing to use the sign, where, at the time he files his application, he knows or ought to know that by using an identical or similar sign for the same goods or services, or goods or services which are so similar as to be capable of being confused, the competitor has already acquired ‘valuable property rights’?

| 3. | If either the first or the second question is answered in the affirmative:
  Is bad faith excluded if the applicant's sign has already obtained a reputation with the public and is therefore protected under competition law? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If either the first or the second question is answered in the affirmative:

Is bad faith excluded if the applicant's sign has already obtained a reputation with the public and is therefore protected under competition law?

---

(1)  OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1.

1

---