Cases, Materials and News on European Civil Procedure

Opinion of Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe, 13 July 2017, in the Case C 341/16, Hanssen Beleggingen BV v. Tanja Prast-Knipping – Article 22(4) Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings concerned with the registration or validity of trade marks

The Advocate General Saugmandsgaard in the Case Case C 341/16, Hanssen Beleggingen BV v. Tanja Prast-Knipping (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf – Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf, Germany), rendered on 13 July 2017 the following Opinion:

  • An action such as that brought in the main proceedings, seeking an order requiring the person formally registered as proprietor of a Benelux mark to make a declaration to the Office Benelux de la propriété intellectuelle (Benelux Office for Intellectual Property, OBPI) that she has no entitlement to the mark and that she waives registration as the proprietor of that mark, does not fall within the scope of 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.

Full text of the Opinion

Updated: July 13, 2017 — 11:25 am

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

EUCP © 2016 Frontier Theme