EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62014CN0020

Case C-20/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespatentgericht (Germany) lodged on 17 January 2014  — BGW Marketing- & Management-Service GmbH v Bodo Scholz

OJ C 129, 28.4.2014, p. 11–11 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

28.4.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/11


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespatentgericht (Germany) lodged on 17 January 2014 — BGW Marketing- & Management-Service GmbH v Bodo Scholz

(Case C-20/14)

2014/C 129/14

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundespatentgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: BGW Marketing- & Management-Service GmbH

Defendant: Bodo Scholz

Question referred

Must Article 4(1)(b) of Directive 2008/95/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of identical and similar goods and services, there may be taken to be a likelihood of confusion for the public if a distinctive sequence of letters which dominates the earlier word/figurative trade mark of average distinctiveness is made use of in a third party’s later mark in such a way that the sequence of letters is supplemented by a descriptive combination of words relating to it which explains the sequence of latters as an abbreviation of the descriptive words?


(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