EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62021CA0183

Case C-183/21: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 10 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Saarbrücken — Germany) — Maxxus Group GmbH & Co. KG v Globus Holding GmbH & Co. KG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Trade marks — Directive (EU) 2015/2436 — Article 19 — Genuine use of a trade mark — Burden of proof — Application to revoke for non-use — National procedural rule obliging the applicant to carry out market research concerning use of the mark)

OJ C 171, 25.4.2022, p. 14–15 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
OJ C 171, 25.4.2022, p. 13–14 (GA)

25.4.2022   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/14


Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 10 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Saarbrücken — Germany) — Maxxus Group GmbH & Co. KG v Globus Holding GmbH & Co. KG

(Case C-183/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Trade marks - Directive (EU) 2015/2436 - Article 19 - Genuine use of a trade mark - Burden of proof - Application to revoke for non-use - National procedural rule obliging the applicant to carry out market research concerning use of the mark)

(2022/C 171/18)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Saarbrücken

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Maxxus Group GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Globus Holding GmbH & Co. KG

Operative part of the judgment

Article 19 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 precluding a procedural rule of a Member State which, in proceedings concerning an application for revocation of a trade mark for non-use, requires the applicant to carry out market research concerning the possible use of that mark by its proprietor and to make in that regard, to the extent possible, substantiated submissions in support of its application.


(1)  OJ C 228, 14.6.2021.


Top