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
Bernhard Rintisch v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-120/12 P)
Judgment
The appeal
The first ground of appeal, alleging i…
Findings of the Court
21

Bernhard Rintisch v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-120/12 P)

Judgment of 3 Oct 2013law://eu/cjeu/2012/c-120-12/para_21@2026-11-11

21Article 74(2) of Regulation No 40/94 provides that OHIM may disregard facts or evidence which are not submitted in due time by the parties concerned.

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Fourth Chamber
Case: C-120/12 P · ECLI:EU:C:2013:638
Decided: 3 Oct 2013
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicant: Bernhard Rintisch
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Rapporteur: L. Bay Larsen
Advocate General: E. Sharpston
Bench: 5 judges
L. Bay Larsen, J. Malenovský, U. Lõhmus, M. Safjan, A. Prechal
Language: English
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62012CJ0120

Topics

History · 1 version

3 Oct 2013Reading

Connections

Cited by 21: Globalia Corporación Empresarial, SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-44/19); Pink Lady America LLC v Community Plant Variety Office (T-112/18); Ramón Guiral Broto v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-89/18); Kenzo Tsujimoto v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-85/16 P, C-86/16 P)2 provisions; European Union Intellectual Property Office v European Food SA (C-634/16 P); Galletas Gullón, SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-456/16); Moravia Consulting spol. s r. o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-317/16); Moravia Consulting spol. s r. o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-318/16); Moravia Consulting spol. s r. o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-316/16); GP Joule PV GmbH & Co. KG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-235/16); Comercializadora Eloro, SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-71/16); Opko Ireland Global Holdings Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-88/16); Ramón Guiral Broto v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-548/15); Ramón Guiral Broto v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-549/15); Sovena Portugal - Consumer Goods, SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-24/16); Polo Club v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-67/15)2 provisions; European Food SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-476/15); Ana Isabel Pinto Eliseu Baptista Lopes Canhoto v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-400/15); Puma SE v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-159/15); European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) v Xavier Grau Ferrer (C-597/14 P)2 provisions; Group OOD v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-567/14)2 provisions
Cites 13: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark; Centrotherm Systemtechnik GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-610/11 P); ThyssenKrupp Nirosta GmbH v European Commission (C-352/09 P); British Aggregates Association v Commission of the European Communities and United Kingdom (C-487/06); New Yorker SHK Jeans GmbH & Co. KG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-621/11 P); Salzgitter AG, formerly Preussag Stahl AG v Commission of the European Communities and Federal Republic of Germany (C-210/98 P); Kaul GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-193/09); Commission Regulation (EC) No 1041/2005 of 29 June 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark (Text with EEA relevance); Bernhard Rintisch v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (T-62/09); Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) v Kaul GmbH (C-29/05 P); Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark; Dansk Rørindustri A/S, Isoplus Fernwärmetechnik Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH and Others, KE KELIT Kunststoffwerk GmbH, LR af 1998 A/S, Brugg Rohrsysteme GmbH, LR af 1998 (Deutschland) GmbH and ABB Asea Brown Boveri Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (C-189/02 P, C-202/02 P, C-205/02 P, C-206/02 P, C-207/02 P, C-208/02 P, C-213/02 P)