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
Osotspa Co. Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-33/03)
Judgment
Law
The request for annulment of the conte…
Findings of the Court
—Comparison of the goods
44

Osotspa Co. Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-33/03)

Judgment of 9 Mar 2005law://eu/cjeu/2003/t-33-03/para_44@2026-11-10

44Furthermore, all the goods in question in Classes 5, 32 and 33 are usually subject to widespread distribution, from the food section of a department store to bars and cafes.

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

Key facts

Court: General Court · Fourth Chamber
Case: T-33/03 · ECLI:EU:T:2005:89
Decided: 9 Mar 2005
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicant: Osotspa Co. Ltd
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Rapporteur: Tiili
Bench: 3 judges
H. Legal, V. Tiili, V. Vadapalas
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62003TJ0033

Topics

History · 1 version

9 Mar 2005Reading

Connections

Cited by 16: Sociedade da Água de Monchique, SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-195/20)6 provisions; Asolo LTD v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-150/17)3 provisions; Altunis-Trading, Gestão e Serviços, Lda v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-438/16); Groupe Canal + and Canal + France v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-591/13); The Hut.com Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-330/12); Longevity Health Products, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-473/11); The Sunrider Corporation v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-221/12); Golden Balls Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-448/11); Knut IP Management Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-250/10); Golden Balls Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-437/11)2 provisions; GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-78/12); GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-206/12); GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-205/12); Scandic Distilleries SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-460/11); Antonino Aiello v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-279/09)2 provisions; Organismos Kypriakis Galaktokomikis Viomichanias v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-534/10)
Cites 15: Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co. GmbH v Klijsen Handel BV (C-342/97); SABEL BV v Puma AG, Rudolf Dassler Sport (C-251/95); Streamserve Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-106/00); Phillips-Van Heusen Corp. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-292/01); Windsurfing Chiemsee Produktions- und Vertriebs GmbH (WSC) v Boots- und Segelzubehör Walter Huber and Franz Attenberger (C-108/97, C-109/97); José Alejandro, SL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-129/01); The Sunrider Corporation v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-24/00); Procter & Gamble v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-122/99); Henkel KGaA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-337/99); Robert Bosch GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-79/01, T-86/01); 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); Axions SA and Christian Belce v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-324/01, T-110/02); Eurocool Logistik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-34/00); Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc., formerly Pathe Communications Corporation (C-39/97); Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark