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
ACTC GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-714/18 P)
The appeal
First ground of appeal
Findings of the Court
36

ACTC GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-714/18 P)

Judgment of 16 Jul 2020law://eu/cjeu/2018/c-714-18/para_36@2026-11-12

36In order that a trade mark may achieve that essential function, Regulation No 207/2009 confers on the proprietor of the mark a set of rights, while limiting them to what is strictly necessary for the performance of that function, as the Advocate General observed in point 40 of her Opinion.

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Second Chamber
Case: C-714/18 P · ECLI:EU:C:2020:573
Decided: 16 Jul 2020
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicant: ACTC GmbH
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Rapporteur: A. Kumin
Advocate General: E. Sharpston
Bench: 3 judges
A. Arabadjiev, T. von Danwitz, A. Kumin
Language: English
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62018CJ0714

Topics

History · 1 version

16 Jul 2020Reading

Connections

Cited by 21: Viva Credit IFN SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-72/25); European Union Intellectual Property Office v Nowhere Co. Ltd (C-337/22 P)2 provisions; Freixenet, SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-222/25); Siemens Healthineers AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-1175/23); Bouwbenodigdheden Hoogeveen BV v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-144/24)4 provisions; Airbnb, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-94/24); Airbnb, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-1032/23); bonnanwalt Vermögens- und Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-83/20); e-dialog GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-1075/23); Tes Electrical Electronic Corp. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-517/23); Skins IP Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-559/23); Telefónica Germany GmbH & Co. OHG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-570/23); Fractal Analytics, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-211/23); Fractal Analytics, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-194/23); Schönegger Käse-Alm GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-161/23); BIW Invest AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-747/22); BIW Invest AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-746/22); Agus sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-603/22); Noah Clothing LLC v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-562/22); Pharmaselect International Beteiligungs GmbH and OmniActive Health Technologies Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-221/22); Mariusz Trus v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-585/22)
Cites 14: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (codified version) (Text with EEA relevance); European Union Intellectual Property Office v Equivalenza Manufactory, SL (C-328/18 P); FTI Touristik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-99/18 P); Der Grüne Punkt - Duales System Deutschland GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-143/19 P); Mega Brands International, Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (C-182/14 P); Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark v Gabriele Schmid (C-514/18); Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) v Kessel medintim GmbH (C-31/14); Outsource Professional Services Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-528/18); Basic Net SpA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-547/17); combit Software GmbH v Commit Business Solutions Ltd (C-223/15); Leno Merken BV v Hagelkruis Beheer BV (C-149/11); Ansul BV v Ajax Brandbeveiliging BV (C-40/01); ACTC GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-94/17)