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

European Union
DHL Express France SAS v Chronopost SA (C-235/09)
Judgment
Consideration of the questions referred
The first question
39

DHL Express France SAS v Chronopost SA (C-235/09)

law://eu/cjeu/2009/c-235-09/para_39@2026-11-13

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

History · 1 version

12 Apr 2011Reading

39Second, the exclusive right of a Community trade mark proprietor, conferred under Regulation No 40/94, extends, as a rule, to the entire area of the European Union, throughout which Community trade marks enjoy uniform protection and have effect.

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Grand Chamber
Case: C-235/09 · ECLI:EU:C:2011:238
Decided: 12 Apr 2011
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Cour de cassation (France)
Applicant: DHL Express France SAS
Defendant: Chronopost SA
Rapporteur: U. Lõhmus
Advocate General: P. Cruz Villalón
Bench: 13 judges
V. Skouris, A. Tizzano, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, K. Lenaerts, J.-C. Bonichot, K. Schiemann, J.-J. Kasel, D. Šváby, R. Silva de Lapuerta, E. Juhász, U. Lõhmus, C. Toader, M. Safjan
Language: French
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62009CJ0235

Topics

Judicial cooperation in civil matters Trade marks

Judgment of 12 Apr 2011

Connections

Interprets 2: Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters; Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark
Cited by 11: Nintendo Co. Ltd v BigBen Interactive GmbH and BigBen Interactive SA (C-24/16, C-25/16)2 provisions; TDH Group v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-46/17); The Coca-Cola Company v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-61/16); Merck KGaA v Merck & Co. Inc. and Others (C-231/16); Ornua Co-operative Limited v Tindale & Stanton Ltd España, SL (C-93/16)2 provisions; combit Software GmbH v Commit Business Solutions Ltd (C-223/15)3 provisions; Max-Heinz Feilen v Finanzamt Fulda (C-123/15); Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Brașov (DGRFP) v Vasile Toma and Biroul Executorului Judecătoresc Horațiu-Vasile Cruduleci (C-205/15); Apple and Pear Australia Ltd and Star Fruits Diffusion v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-378/13)2 provisions; Leno Merken BV v Hagelkruis Beheer BV (C-149/11)2 provisions; Génesis Seguros Generales Sociedad Anónima de Seguros y Reaseguros (Génesis) v Boys Toys SA and Administración del Estado (C-190/10)2 provisions
Cites 7: Treaty on European Union (consolidated 2016); Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters; Directive 2004/48/EC; Unibet (London) Ltd and Unibet (International) Ltd v Justitiekanslern (C-432/05); Google France SARL and Google Inc. v Louis Vuitton Malletier SA, Google France SARL v Viaticum SA and Luteciel SARL and Google France SARL v Centre national de recherche en relations humaines (CNRRH) SARL and Others (C-236/08, C-237/08, C-238/08); Nokia Corp. v Joacim Wärdell (C-316/05); Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark