Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2014:2233
Date: 2014-09-18
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Second Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property;Approximation of laws
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Netherlands

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 18 September 2014 1. Approximation of laws — Trade marks — Directive 89/104 — Refusal or invalidation of registration — Signs consisting exclusively of the shape which results from the very nature of the goods — Ground for refusal applicable to a sign with one or more essential characteristics which are inherent to the generic function or functions of the product (Council Directive 89/104, Art. 3(1)(e), 1st indent) 2. Approximation of laws — Trade marks — Directive 89/104 — Refusal or invalidation of registration — Signs consisting exclusively of the shape which give substantial value to the goods — Ground for refusal applicable to a sign which consists exclusively of the shape of a product with several characteristics each of which may give that product substantial value (Council Directive 89/104, Art. 3(1)(e), 3rd indent) 3. Approximation of laws — Trade marks — Directive 89/104 — Refusal or invalidation of registration — Signs consisting exclusively of the shape which results from the very nature of the product — Signs consisting exclusively of the shape which gives value to the goods — No combined application of the grounds for refusal (Council Directive 89/104, Art. 3(1)(e), 1st and 3rd indents) 1. The first indent of Article 3(1)(e) of First Directive 89/104 on trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that the ground for refusal of registration set out in that provision may apply to a sign which consists exclusively of the shape of a product with one or more essential characteristics which are inherent to the generic function or functions of that product and which consumers may be looking for in the products of competitors. (see para. 27, operative part 1) 2. The third indent of Article 3(1)(e) of First Directive 89/104 on trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that the ground for refusal of registration set out in that provision may apply to a sign which consists exclusively of the shape of a product with several characteristics each of which may give that product substantial value. The target public’s perception of the shape of that product is only one of the assessment criteria which may be used to determine whether that ground for refusal is applicable. (see para. 36, operative part 2) 3. Article 3(1)(e) of First Directive 89/104 on trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that the grounds for refusal of registration set out in the first and third indents of that provision may not be applied in combination. (see para. 43, operative part 3)