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
Matratzen Concord AG v Hukla Germany SA (C-421/04)
Judgment
The question referred
19

Matratzen Concord AG v Hukla Germany SA (C-421/04)

Judgment of 9 Mar 2006law://eu/cjeu/2004/c-421-04/para_19@2026-11-10

19As is clear from the seventh recital in the preamble, the Directive lists in an exhaustive manner the grounds for refusal or invalidity of registration concerning the trade mark itself.

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · First Chamber
Case: C-421/04 · ECLI:EU:C:2006:164
Decided: 9 Mar 2006
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona (Spain)
Applicant: Matratzen Concord AG
Defendant: Hukla Germany SA
Rapporteur: M. Ilešič
Advocate General: F.G. Jacobs
Bench: 5 judges
P. Jann, N. Colneric, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, M. Ilešič, E. Levits
Language: Spanish
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62004CJ0421

Topics

Approximation of laws Trade marks

History · 1 version

9 Mar 2006Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks
Cited by 8: Gintec International Import-Export GmbH v Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb eV (C-374/05)2 provisions; Sky plc and Others v Skykick UK Limited and Skykick Inc (C-371/18)2 provisions; Mederer GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-210/14); Junited Autoglas Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-297/13); Bimbo, SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (T-569/10); Internetportal und Marketing GmbH v Richard Schlicht (C-569/08)2 provisions; Giampietro Torresan v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-234/06); Develey Holding GmbH & Co. Beteiligungs KG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-238/06 P)2 provisions
Cites 14: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)3 provisions; First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks; Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Schiavon Silvano (C-230/98); Phytheron International SA v Jean Bourdon SA (C-352/95); DaimlerChrysler AG v Land Baden-Württemberg (C-324/99); Ravil SARL v Bellon import SARL and Biraghi SpA (C-469/00); Terrapin (Overseas) Ltd. v Terranova Industrie CA Kapferer & Co (119/75); Dansk Supermarked A/S v A/S Imerco (58/80); F.lli Graffione SNC v Ditta Fransa (C-313/94); Henkel KGaA (C-218/01); Koninklijke KPN Nederland NV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (C-363/99); Windsurfing Chiemsee Produktions- und Vertriebs GmbH (WSC) v Boots- und Segelzubehör Walter Huber and Franz Attenberger (C-108/97, C-109/97); Matratzen Concord GmbH, formerly Matratzen Concord AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-3/03); The Queen, on the application of: Swedish Match AB and Swedish Match UK Ltd v Secretary of State for Health (C-210/03)