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 62017TJ0188

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 May 2018.
Bernard Krone Holding SE & Co. KG v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark Coil Liner — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75, first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001).
Case T-188/17.

Court reports – general

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 May 2018 –
Bernard Krone Holding v EUIPO (Coil Liner)

(Case T‑188/17)

(EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark Coil Liner — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75, first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001))

1. 

EU trade mark—Procedural provisions—Statement of reasons for decisions—Article 75, first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009—Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU

(Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75, first sentence)

(see para. 21)

2. 

Actions for annulment—Pleas in law—Infringement of essential procedural requirements—Inadequate statement of reasons—To be considered of the Court’s own motion—Obligation to comply with the audi ateram partem principle

(Arts 263 TFEU and 296 TFEU)

(see para. 22)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 January 2017 (Case R 443/2016 –1) concerning an application for registration of the word mark Coil Liner as an EU trade mark.

Operative part

The Court:

1. 

Annuls paragraph 2 of the operative part of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 9 January 2017 (Case R 443/2016–1);

2. 

Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Bernard Krone Holding SE & Co. KG in the proceedings before the General Court.
Top