CELEX: 62015CA0179
Language: en
Date: 2016-03-03 00:00:00
Title: Case C-179/15: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 March 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék — Hungary) — Daimler AG v Együd Garage Gépjárműjavító és Értékesítő Kft. (References for a preliminary ruling — Trade marks — Directive 2008/95/EC — Article 5(1) — Advertisements relating to a third party accessible on the internet — Unauthorised use of the mark — Advertisements published online without the knowledge and without the consent of that third party or maintained online despite the opposition of that third party — Action of the trade mark proprietor against that third party)

2.5.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 156/19
            
         Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 March 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék — Hungary) — Daimler AG v Együd Garage Gépjárműjavító és Értékesítő Kft.
   (Case C-179/15) (1)
   
   ((References for a preliminary ruling - Trade marks - Directive 2008/95/EC - Article 5(1) - Advertisements relating to a third party accessible on the internet - Unauthorised use of the mark - Advertisements published online without the knowledge and without the consent of that third party or maintained online despite the opposition of that third party - Action of the trade mark proprietor against that third party))
   (2016/C 156/27)
   Language of the case: Hungarian
   
      Referring court
   
   Fővárosi Törvényszék
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Daimler AG
   
      Defendant: Együd Garage Gépjárműjavító és Értékesítő Kft.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that a third party, who is named in an advertisement on a website, which contains a sign identical or similar to a trade mark in such a way as to give the impression that there is a commercial relationship between him and the proprietor of the trade mark, does not make use of that sign that may be prohibited by that proprietor under that provision, where that advertisement has not been placed by that third party or on his behalf or, if that advertisement has been placed by that third party or on his behalf with the consent of the proprietor, where that third party has expressly requested the operator of that website, from whom the third party ordered the advertisement, to remove the advertisement or the reference to the mark contained therein.
   
      (1)  OJ C 228, 13.7.2015.