Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62012CN0320

Case C-320/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Højesteret (Denmark) lodged on 2 July 2012 — Malaysia Dairy Industries Pte. Ltd v Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker

OJ C 258, 25.8.2012, p. 14–14 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

25.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 258/14

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Højesteret (Denmark) lodged on 2 July 2012 — Malaysia Dairy Industries Pte. Ltd v Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker

(Case C-320/12)

2012/C 258/22

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Højesteret

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Malaysia Dairy Industries Pte. Ltd

Defendant: Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker

Questions referred

1.

Is the concept of bad faith in Article 4(4)(g) 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 (1) an expression of a legal standard which may be filled out in accordance with national law, or is it a concept of European Union law which must be given a uniform interpretation throughout the European Union?

2.

If the concept of bad faith in Article 4(4)(g) of Directive 2008/95/EC is a concept of European Union law, must the concept be understood as meaning that it may suffice that the applicant knew or should have known of the foreign mark at the time of filing the application, or is there a further requirement concerning the applicant’s subjective position in order for registration to be denied?

3.

Can a Member State choose to introduce a specific protection of foreign marks which, in relation to the requirement of bad faith, differs from Article 4(4)(g) of Directive 2008/95/EC, for example by laying down a special requirement that the applicant knew or should have known of the foreign mark?

(1)  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 (OJ 2008 L 299, p. 25).

Top