Order — ECLI:EU:C:2015:680
Date: 2015-10-06
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: General provisions;Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property;Approximation of laws
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Italy

Summary — Order of the Court (Third Chamber), 6 October 2015 1. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Answer admitting of no reasonable doubt —Application of Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure (Art. 267 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 99) 2. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Questions which are manifestly irrelevant, hypothetical questions put in a context not permitting a useful answer and questions bearing no relation to the purpose of the main action — None — Admissibility (Art. 267 TFEU) 3. Approximation of laws — Designs — Interpretation of Regulation No 6/2002 and of Directive 98/71 — No derogation from the provisions of Regulation No 207/2009 and Directive 2008/95 — Affixing, by a manufacturer of replacement parts and accessories for motor vehicles, to its products of a sign identical to a trade mark, registered for such products by a producer of motor vehicles, without obtaining the latter’s consent — Not permissible — Use of that trade mark being the only way of repairing the vehicle concerned, restoring to that complex product its original appearance — No effect (Council Regulations No 6/2002, Arts 1, 96(1) and 110, and No 207/2009; European Parliament and Council Directives 98/71, Arts 2, 16 and 14, and 2008/95) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 32, 33) 2. See the text of the decision. (see paras 35-37) 3. Article 14 of Directive 98/71 on the legal protection of designs and Article 110 of Regulation No 6/2002 on Community designs must be interpreted as not allowing, by way of derogation from the provisions of Directive 2008/95 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks and Regulation No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark, a manufacturer of replacement parts and accessories for motor vehicles, such as wheel covers, to affix to its products a sign identical to a trade mark registered for such products inter alia by a producer of motor vehicles, without obtaining the latter’s consent, on the ground that the use thus made of that trade mark is the only way of repairing the vehicle concerned, restoring to that complex product its original appearance. First, it is clear from the wording of Article 14 of Directive 98/71 and of Article 110 of Regulation No 6/2002 that those provisions impose certain limitations only on protection as designs, without any reference to protection as trade marks. Second, Article 2 of Directive 98/71 provides that that directive applies only to design rights registered with certain national and international design offices and applications for registration of design rights. Furthermore, it is clear from Article 1 of Regulation No 6/2002, read in the light of recital 5 of that regulation, that the purpose of the latter is merely to create a Community design which is directly applicable in each Member State. Third and lastly, it is clear from recital 7 and Article 16 of Directive 98/71, and also from recital 31 and Article 96(1) of Regulation No 6/2002, that those measures of EU law apply without prejudice to any provisions of that law or of the law of the Member State concerned relating, inter alia, to trade marks. It follows that Article 14 of Directive 98/71 and Article 110 of Regulation No 6/2002 do not contain any derogation from the provisions of Directive 2008/95 and Regulation No 207/2009. (see paras 39-42, 45, operative part)