Bang & Olufsen A/S v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-508/08)

Judgment of 6 Oct 2011

law://eu/cjeu/2008/t-508-08/para_44@2026-11-13

44Consequently, if the examination of a sign under Article 7(1)(e) of Regulation No 40/94 leads to the conclusion that one of the criteria mentioned in that provision is met, this results in a release from examination of the sign under Article 7(3) of the regulation, since registration of the sign in such circumstances is clearly impossible (see, to that effect, Case C-371/06 Benetton Group [2007] ECR I-7709, paragraph 26). That release explains the advantage of undertaking a prior examination of the sign under Article 7(1)(e) of Regulation No 40/94 where several of the absolute grounds for refusal provided for in paragraph 1 may apply, although such a release may not be interpreted as implying that there is an obligation to examine that sign first under Article 7(1)(e) of Regulation No 40/94.

Bang & Olufsen A/S v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-508/08)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections