Ursula Adamowski v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-537/10, T-538/10)

Judgment of 29 Nov 2012

law://eu/cjeu/2010/t-537-10/para_22@2026-11-15

22The application of Article 8(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 requires the applicant for the mark to be or to have been the agent or representative of the proprietor of the mark and the application to have been filed in the name of the agent or representative without the proprietor’s consent and without there being legitimate reasons to justify the agent’s or representative’s action. That provision is designed to prevent the misuse of a mark by the trade mark proprietor’s agent, as the agent may exploit the knowledge and experience acquired during its business relationship with the proprietor and therefore improperly benefit from the effort and investment which the trade mark proprietor himself made (Case T-6/05 DEF-TEC Defense Technology v OHMI - Defense Technology (FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR) [2006] ECR II-2671, paragraph 38).

Ursula Adamowski v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-537/10, T-538/10)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections