Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent und Markenamt information
This article does not cite any sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent und Markenamt" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR(March 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent und Markenamt
European Court of Justice
Submitted 10 July 2000 Decided 12 December 2002
Full case name
Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt
Case
C-273/00
CelexID
62000CJ0273
ECLI
ECLI:EU:C:2002:748
Case type
Reference for a preliminary ruling
Chamber
Full court
Nationality of parties
Germany
Procedural history
Bundespatentgericht, Preliminary reference of 14 April 2000 (33 W (pat) 193/99)
Ruling
1. Article 2 of Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that a trade mark may consist of a sign which is not in itself capable of being perceived visually, provided that it can be represented graphically, particularly by means of images, lines or characters, and that the representation is clear, precise, self-contained, easily accessible, intelligible, durable and objective.
2. In respect of an olfactory sign, the requirements of graphic representability are not satisfied by a chemical formula, by a description in written words, by the deposit of an odour sample or by a combination of those elements.
Court composition
Judge-Rapporteur Fidelma O’Kelly Macken
Advocate General Dámaso Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer
Legislation affecting
Interprets Directive 89/104/EEC
In trademark law, Sieckmann v German Patent and Trademark Office (case C-273/00) issued on December 12, 2002, is widely recognised as a landmark decision of the European Court of Justice on the graphical representation of non-conventional trademarks under the European Trade Marks Directive.
The case involved a "methyl cinnamate" scent, which the applicant had described "as balsamically fruity with a slight hint of cinnamon". The ECJ ruled that (a) a chemical formula depicting this scent did not represent the odour of a substance, was not sufficiently intelligible, nor sufficiently clear and precise; (b) a written description was not sufficiently clear, precise and objective; and (c) a physical deposit of a sample of the scent did not constitute a graphic representation, and was not sufficiently stable or durable.
The case illustrates difficulties with the graphical representation of scent marks, as the ECJ held that these representations, whether individually or collectively, could not satisfy this requirement.
and 22 Related for: Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent und Markenamt information
In trademark law, Sieckmannv German Patent and Trademark Office (case C-273/00) issued on December 12, 2002, is widely recognised as a landmark decision...
The German Patent and Trade Mark Office (German: DeutschesPatent- undMarkenamt; abbreviation: DPMA) is the German national patent office, with headquarters...
Nelson vDeutsche Lufthansa AG and R (TUI Travel, British Airways, easyjet and IATA) v Civil Aviation Authority. In the case of Denise McDonagh v Ryanair...
were strongly influenced by the Delfi AS v. Estonia and Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete and Index.hu Zrt v. Hungary ECtHR cases, which outlined a...
law. Commission v Luxembourg and Belgium also has a logical connection with the nearly contemporaneous Van Gend en Loos and Costa v ENEL decisions, as...
irritating fumes. Food Chemicals Codex Eucalyptus oil RalfSieckmannvDeutschesPatentundMarkenamt, a court case concerning a company attempting to trademark...
8–13 WTD 2003 arts 6 and 17 and Pfeiffer vDeutsches Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV (2005) C-397/01 Boyle v Equal Opportunities Commission (1998) C-411/96...
young v. mature people, ethnicities of all kinds, lawyers v. non-lawyers, experts v. lay persons, male v. female, politically active individuals v. politically...
Villa v Cortefiel Servicios SA Peter Paul and Others v Bundesrepublik Deutschland Procureur du Roi v Dassonville RalfSieckmannvDeutschesPatentund Markenamt...
Akarnanias v GlaxoSmithKline plc and GlaxoSmithKline AEVE". 31 May 2005. Retrieved 23 February 2022 – via EUR-Lex. "Rheinmühlen-Düsseldorf v Einfuhr- und Vorratsstelle...
2015, p. 46 "European Ombudsman". Europa (web portal). In Roquette Frères v Council [1980] ECR 3333. "The EU following the LisbonTreaty (Reform Treaty)"...
British courts to enforce financial regulations, and Germany’s BaFin v. Deutsche Bank which protected MiFD 2’s regulations for German financial companies...
Subsidiaritätsprinzip als wirtschaftliches Ordnungsprinzip", Wirtschaftliche Entwicklung und soziale Ordnung. Degenfeld-Festschrift, Vienna: von Lagler and J. Messner...
Villa v Cortefiel Servicios SA Peter Paul and Others v Bundesrepublik Deutschland Procureur du Roi v Dassonville RalfSieckmannvDeutschesPatentund Markenamt...
the primacy of EU law in certain areas of the Polish legal order. In Costa v. ENEL. Mr Costa was an Italian citizen opposed to the nationalisation of energy...
by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen. Direct effect has subsequently...
five major codes, a variety of special codes related to military objects, patents, railways, shipping, etc. In Belgium, a jurisprudence administered by the...
relationship between rights and remedies in EC law: in search of the missing link". Common Market Law Review. Archived from the original on 2015-06-13. v t e...
could be traced in CJEU case law, such as the case Greece v Council from 1986 and Luxembourg v Parliament from 1981, where the Court established that "the...
Global Information
