News & Publications

In the case OHIM/National Lottery Commission (C-530/12 P) the Advocate-General Mr. Yves Bot submitted his conclusions on 28 November 2013, and the hearing before the Court of Justice is planned for the next March 27. The interest in this case is evident because it deals with the possibility that national laws can be considered as European Community Law, by studying thoroughly the doctrine of the judgment given by the Court of Justice on July 2011 (Edwin/OHIM).

The Court of Justice will soon pass a decision on the preliminary ruling submitted by the Austrian Court of Patents and Trade Marks, in a case of trade mark revocation for the loss of its distinctiveness (case C-409/12 Backaldrin Österreich The Kornspitz Company GMBH against Pfahni Backmittel GmbH). These notes are written according to conclusions already presented by the Advocate-General.

The Judgement of the Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber) of 25 January 2017 resolves a referral raised for preliminary ruling concerning the case between Stowarzyszenie “Oławska Telewizja Kablowa” (OTK) and Stowarzyszenie Filmowców Polskich (SFP), in relation to the interpretation of Article 13 of Directive 2004/48/EC.

The Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016, in the case Mondelez UK Holdings & Services Ltd versus EUIPO and Société des produits Nestlé SA, analyses Article 7 of Regulation No 207/2009.

Judgement of the General Court of 15 December 2016 in Case T-529/15 Intesa Sanpaolo SpA vs EUIPO.

The Judgement of the General Court of 15 December 2016, in the case Novartis AG versus EUIPO, analyses Article 7(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.

The Judgement of the General Court of 30 November 2016, in the case K&K Group AG versus EUIPO and Pret A Manger (Europe) Ltd, analyses Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009.

The new REGULATION (EU) 2016/679 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL of 27 April 2016, came into effect on 25 May 2016, with reference to the protection of natural persons regarding the processing of personal data and the free movement of such data.

The Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016, in the case of The Lacamanda Group Ltd versus EUIPO and Nigel Woolley, interprets the conditions that must be satisfied to be afforded the broader protection under Article 8(5).

The Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2016, in the case Victor International GmbH versus EUIPO and Gregorio Ovejero Jiménez, interprets the proof of genuine use of an earlier national trademark, and the likelihood of confusion between the earlier national trademark and the EU mark applied for.