Vragen aan HvJ EU over debranding, rebranding en herkenbaarheid van uiterlijk voor import in EER

Vragen aan HvJ EU, 2017, IEF 16770; IEFbe 2158; C-129/17 (Mitsubishi Shoji Kaisha and Mitsubishi Caterpillar Forklift Europe) Merkenrecht. Kan een merkhouder zich verzetten tegen debranding door een derde partij wanneer de goederen nooit eerder in de EER verhandeld zijn geweest, met het oog op importeren of het verkopen van goederen in de EER. Maakt het uit of daarbij sprake is van rebranding door de derde partij? Maakt het enig verschil of de geïmporteerde goederen op basis van hun uiterlijk verschijning of het model door de relevante gemiddelde consument geïdentificeerd zullen worden als afkomstig van de merkhouder? De gestelde vragen:

1. (a) Do the articles 5 of Directive 2008/95/EC and 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (codified version) cover the right of the trade-mark proprietor to oppose the removal, by a third party, without the consent of the trade-mark proprietor, of all signs identical to the trade marks which had been applied to the goods (debranding), in the case where the goods concerned have never previously been traded within the European Economic Area, such as goods placed in a customs warehouse, and where the removal by the third party occurs with a view to importing or placing those goods on the market within the European Economic Area?

1. (b) Does it make any difference to the answer to Question (a) above whether the importation of those goods or their placing on the market within the European Economic Area occurs under its own distinctive sign applied by the third party (rebranding)?

2. Does it make any difference to the answer to the first question whether the goods thus imported or placed on the market are, on the basis of their outward appearance or model, still identified by the relevant average consumer as originating from the trademark proprietor?

Dossier in curia.europa.eu.