Case C-197/21: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 27 October 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Soda-Club (CO2) SA, SodaStream International BV v MySoda Oy (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Trade-mark law — Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Article 15(2) — Directive (EU) 2015/2436 — Article 15(2) — Exhaustion of the rights conferred by the trade mark — Cylinders containing carbon dioxide — Placing on the market in a Member State by the trade mark proprietor — Activity of a reseller consisting in refilling and relabelling cylinders — Opposition brought by the trade mark proprietor — Legitimate reasons to oppose further commercialisation of the goods bearing the trade mark)
Date: 2022-10-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, economic concentration, labelling, packaging product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022472EN.01001201.xml










12.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 472/12






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 27 October 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Soda-Club (CO2) SA, SodaStream International BV v MySoda Oy
(Case C-197/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Trade-mark law - Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 15(2) - Directive (EU) 2015/2436 - Article 15(2) - Exhaustion of the rights conferred by the trade mark - Cylinders containing carbon dioxide - Placing on the market in a Member State by the trade mark proprietor - Activity of a reseller consisting in refilling and relabelling cylinders - Opposition brought by the trade mark proprietor - Legitimate reasons to oppose further commercialisation of the goods bearing the trade mark)
(2022/C 472/14)
Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Soda-Club (CO2) SA, SodaStream International BV

Defendant: MySoda Oy

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark and Article 15(2) of Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks
must be interpreted as meaning that the proprietor of a trade mark who has put on the market, in a Member State, goods bearing that mark and intended to be re-used and refilled many times, is not entitled, under those provisions, to oppose further commercialisation of those goods, in that Member State, by a reseller who has refilled them and has replaced the label, on which the original mark appeared, by another labelling, while leaving the original mark on those goods, unless that new labelling creates a false impression in the minds of consumers that there is an economic connection between the reseller and the trade mark proprietor. That likelihood of confusion must be assessed globally in the light of the information appearing on the product and its new labelling and having regard to the distribution practices of the sector concerned and the level of knowledge that consumers have of those practices.


(1)  OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.