December 9th, 2019
Published on December 15th, 2017 | by Olga Papadopoulou0
CJEU C 341/16, Reg. 1215/2012, Reg. 44/2001 -Art. 2(1),Art.22(4) -Proceedings to determine whether a person was correctly registered as the proprietor of a trade mark
Hanssen Beleggingen BV v Tanja Prast-Knipping,
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber), 5 October 2017 (*)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Jurisdiction — Article 2(1) — Jurisdiction of the courts of the place where the defendant is domiciled — Article 22(4) — Exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings concerned with the registration or validity of intellectual property rights — Proceedings to determine whether a person was correctly registered as the proprietor of a trade mark)
In those circumstances, the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Higher Regional Court, Düsseldorf) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
‘Does the notion of proceedings which are “concerned with the registration or validity of … trade marks”, within the meaning of Article 22(4) of Regulation [No 44/2001], also cover a claim, brought against the formal proprietor of a Benelux trade mark registered in the Benelux trade mark register, which seeks an order requiring that defendant to make a declaration to [BIPO] that she has no entitlement to the contested mark and that she waives registration as the proprietor of that mark?’
On those grounds, the Court (Second Chamber) hereby rules:
Article 22(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as not applying to proceedings to determine whether a person was correctly registered as the proprietor of a trade mark.
For more information, here..