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
Proceedings brought by Oy Hartwall Ab (C-578/17)
Consideration of the questions referred
The first question
34

Proceedings brought by Oy Hartwall Ab (C-578/17)

Judgment of 27 Mar 2019law://eu/cjeu/2017/c-578-17/para_34@2026-11-11

34Thus, in the overall analysis of distinctive character by reference to the actual situation, it is necessary to examine whether and to what extent the systematically arranged colour combination is capable of conferring inherent distinctive character on the sign in question.

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Fourth Chamber
Case: C-578/17 · ECLI:EU:C:2019:261
Decided: 27 Mar 2019
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Supreme Administrative Court, Finland)
Rapporteur: E. Juhász
Advocate General: H. Saugmandsgaard Øe
Bench: 5 judges
T. von Danwitz, K. Jürimäe, C. Lycourgos, E. Juhász, C. Vajda
Language: Finnish
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62017CJ0578

Topics

History · 1 version

27 Mar 2019Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version) (Text with EEA relevance)
Cited by 3: Aktiebolaget Östgötatrafiken v Patent-och registreringsverket (C-456/19)2 provisions; CEDC International sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-796/16); Red Bull GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-124/18 P)
Cites 7: Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version) (Text with EEA relevance); Oberbank AG and Others v Deutscher Sparkassen- und Giroverband eV (C-217/13, C-218/13); Libertel Groep BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (C-104/01); Heidelberger Bauchemie GmbH (C-49/02); Shield Mark BV v Joost Kist h.o.d.n. Memex (C-283/01); Proceedings brought by Oy Hartwall Ab (C-578/17); Koninklijke KPN Nederland NV v Benelux-Merkenbureau (C-363/99)