Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 14.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/26 |

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, lodged on 21 February 2007 — Adidas AG and Adidas Benelux BV v Marca Mode, C&A Nederland, H&M Hennes & Mauritz Netherlands BV and Vendex KBB Nederland BV

(Case C-102/07)

(2007/C 82/48)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Adidas AG and Adidas Benelux BV

Respondents: Marca Mode, C&A Nederland, H&M Hennes & Mauritz Netherlands BV and Vendex KBB Nederland BV

Questions referred

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| 1. | In the determination of the extent to which protection should be given to a trade mark formed by a sign which does not in itself have any distinctive character or by a designation which corresponds to the description in Article 3(1)(c) of Directive 89/104/EEC[(1)](#ntr1-C_2007082EN.01002601-E0001), but which has become a trade mark through the process of becoming customary and has been registered, should account be taken of the general interest in ensuring that the availability of given signs is not unduly restricted for other traders offering the goods or services concerned (the requirement of availability)? |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| 2. | If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative: does it make any difference whether the signs which are referred to therein and which are to be held available are seen by the relevant public as being signs used to distinguish goods or merely to embellish them? |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| 3. | If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative: does it, further, make any difference whether the sign contested by the holder of a trade mark is devoid of distinctive character, within the terms of Article 3(1)(b) of Directive 89/104/EEC, or contains a designation, within the terms of Article 3(1)(c) of the Directive? |

---

[Top](#document1)