Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Telefon & Buch Verlagsgesellschaft mbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-322/03)
Judgment
Substance
The third plea, alleging infringement…
Findings of the Court
95

Telefon & Buch Verlagsgesellschaft mbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-322/03)

Judgment of 16 Mar 2006law://eu/cjeu/2003/t-322-03/para_95@2026-11-11

95The term ‘weiβe Seiten’ is put together correctly in conformity with German grammar rules, as the applicant indeed states, and is made up of current German words.

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: General Court · Third Chamber
Case: T-322/03 · ECLI:EU:T:2006:87
Decided: 16 Mar 2006
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicant: Telefon & Buch Verlagsgesellschaft mbH
Defendant: Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Rapporteur: Tiili
Bench: 3 judges
M. Jaeger, V. Tiili, O. Czúcz
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62003TJ0322

Topics

History · 1 version

16 Mar 2006Reading

Connections

Cited by 21: Olvi Oyj v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-1132/23); Victoria's Secret Stores Brand Management, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-810/19); Gábor Bende v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-878/19); EC Brand Comércio, Importação e Exportação de Vestuário em Geral Ltda v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-532/19); Fissler GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-423/18)2 provisions; Parfümerie Akzente GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-787/17); Senetic S.A. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-207/17); Senetic S.A. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-208/17); Mühlbauer Technology GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-218/16); Meissen Keramik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-776/15); Intesa Sanpaolo SpA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-129/15); Trinity Haircare AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-453/15); Warimex Waren- Import Export Handels-GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-454/14); Karl-May-Verlag GmbH, formerly Karl May Verwaltungs- und Vertriebs- GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-501/13)2 provisions; Ewald Dörken AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-223/14); TrekStor Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-649/13); TrekStor Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-636/13); Geilenkothen Fabrik für Schutzkleidung GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-822/14); Republic of Cyprus v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-292/14, T-293/14)2 provisions; Volkswagen AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-550/14)2 provisions; Volkswagen AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-321/14)
Cites 25: Eurocool Logistik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-34/00); Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) v Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company (C-191/01 P); Metso Paper Automation Oy v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-19/04); Campina Melkunie BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (C-265/00); Koninklijke KPN Nederland NV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (C-363/99); DKV Deutsche Krankenversicherung AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (C-104/00 P); Merz & Krell GmbH & Co. (C-517/99); Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark; Streamserve Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-106/00); Deutsche Krankenversicherung AG (DKV) v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-359/99); Alcon Inc, formerly Alcon Universal Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-237/01); Procter & Gamble Company v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-383/99 P); Ellos AB v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-219/00); Messe München GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-32/00); Bayer AG v Commission of the European Communities (C-195/91 P); José Alejandro, SL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-129/01); Ampafrance SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-164/03); Telefon & Buch VerlagsgmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-357/99, T-358/99); DaimlerChrysler AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-355/00); Jean-Pierre Koubi v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-10/03); Società Industriale Metallurgica di Napoli (SIMET) and Acciaierie e Ferriere di Roma (FERAM) v High Authority of the ECSC (C-25/65, C-26/65); Eurocermex SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-399/02); Mitsubishi HiTec Paper Bielefeld GmbH, formerly Stora Carbonless Paper GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-331/99); DaimlerChrysler AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-356/00); DaimlerChrysler AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-358/00)