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
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) v Kaul GmbH (C-29/05 P)
Judgment
The appeal
Findings of the Court
The nature of the proceedings followed…
57

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) v Kaul GmbH (C-29/05 P)

Judgment of 13 Mar 2007law://eu/cjeu/2005/c-29-05/para_57@2026-11-10

57It thus follows from Article 62(1) of Regulation No 40/94 that, through the effect of the appeal brought before it, the Board of Appeal is called upon to carry out a new, full examination of the merits of the opposition, in terms of both law and fact

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Grand Chamber
Case: C-29/05 P · ECLI:EU:C:2007:162
Decided: 13 Mar 2007
Procedure: Action for annulment
Ruled invalid: 62002TJ0164
Applicant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Defendant: Kaul GmbH
Rapporteur: K. Schiemann
Advocate General: E. Sharpston
Bench: 13 judges
V. Skouris, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas, K. Lenaerts, J. Klucka, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, R. Silva de Lapuerta, K. Schiemann, G. Arestis, A. Borg Barthet, M. Ilešič, J. Malenovský
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62005CJ0029

Topics

History · 1 version

13 Mar 2007Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Kaul GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-164/02)
Cited by 25: Osculati Srl v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-267/25); Vitabalans Oy v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-410/25); MAN Truck & Bus SE v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-108/25); Mostostal S.A. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-663/24); Athom Holding BV v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-618/24); Lavrentios Lavrentiadis v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-515/24); SiLog GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-572/24); Amphora Wineries AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-556/24); Centex SpA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-34/25); Homestar sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-611/24); Confrasilvas - Construções S. A. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-557/24); Vinatis v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-86/24); JSherwood sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-448/24); Starbuzz Tobacco, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-404/24); Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-121/24); Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-128/24); Vintae Luxury Wine Specialists SLU v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-402/24); Ferrari SpA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-1103/23); Uniper Global Commodities SE v European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (T-96/23); RWE Supply & Trading GmbH v European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (T-95/23); Sven Benschop v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-76/24); Dr. August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-679/20); Laura Food Srl v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-95/24); Unite Network SE v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-1186/23); Asaş Alüminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-172/24)
Cites 5: Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark; Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark; Sergio Rossi SpA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-214/05); Libertel Groep BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (C-104/01); The Sunrider Corporation v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-416/04 P)