CURIA - Case information

Home > Search form > List of results > Case information

Start printing

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 March 2018

DOCERAM GmbH v CeramTec GmbH

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Intellectual and industrial property — Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Community design — Article 8(1) — Features of appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function — Criteria for assessment — Existence of alternative designs — Consideration of the point of view of an ‘objective observer’

Case C-395/16

Documents in the Case

Document

Date

Name of the parties

Subject-matter

Curia

EUR-Lex

Autres Liens

Judgment (OJ)

20/04/2018

DOCERAM

General and final provisions

Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2018:172

08/03/2018

DOCERAM

General and final provisions

Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2018:172

08/03/2018

DOCERAM

General and final provisions

Application (OJ)

28/10/2016

DOCERAM

General and final provisions

Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2017:779

19/10/2017

DOCERAM

General and final provisions

Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Information not available

Systematic classification scheme

1 The legal order of the European Union
1.07 Interpretation of EU law

4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.11 Approximation of laws
    4.11.04 Community designs
      4.11.04.01 null
        4.11.04.01.06

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Directive 98/71 : paragraph 19
Regulation 6/2002 : paragraphs 25, 27, 34, 36
Regulation 6/2002 -A03 : paragraph 4
Regulation 6/2002 -A03LA : paragraph 24
Regulation 6/2002 -A04P1 : paragraph 5
Regulation 6/2002 -A05 : paragraph 6
Regulation 6/2002 -A06 : paragraph 7
Regulation 6/2002 -A06P1 : paragraph 24
Regulation 6/2002 -A08P1 : paragraphs 1, 8, 13 - 19, 22, 23, 26, 29 - 33, 35, 38
Regulation 6/2002 -A10P1 : paragraphs 9, 24, 35
Regulation 6/2002 -C5 : paragraphs 3, 28
Regulation 6/2002 -C7 : paragraphs 3, 28
Regulation 6/2002 -C10 : paragraphs 3, 29
Court of Justice - Judgment C -33/11 -N27 : paragraph 20
Court of Justice - Judgment C -361/15 -N62 : paragraph 25
Court of Justice - Opinion C -395/16 : paragraphs 19, 23, 30, 37
Court of Justice - Judgment C -247/16 -N31 : paragraph 20

Operative part

Interprets : Regulation 6/2002 -A08P1

Opinion

Directive 89/104 -A03P1LET1 : points 43, 45
Regulation 40/94 -A07P1LEPT2 : point 43
Directive 98/71 -A07P1 : point 36
Regulation 6/2002 -A03LA : point 28
Regulation 6/2002 -A04 : points 5, 27, 68
Regulation 6/2002 -A04P2 : point 28
Regulation 6/2002 -A05 : points 6, 16, 27, 68
Regulation 6/2002 -A05P2 : point 41
Regulation 6/2002 -A06 : points 7, 16, 27, 57, 68
Regulation 6/2002 -A06P1 : point 42
Regulation 6/2002 -A06P2 : point 60
Regulation 6/2002 -A08P1 : points 1, 8, 11 - 14, 17 - 19, 21, 22, 25 - 27, 29, 31, 36 - 40, 43, 44, 47 - 49, 52 - 54, 57, 58, 60, 62, 67, 70, 71
Regulation 6/2002 -A10 : point 57
Regulation 6/2002 -A10P1 : points 28, 57, 60
Regulation 6/2002 -A10P2 : point 60
Regulation 6/2002 -A12 : point 39
Regulation 6/2002 -A96 : point 39
Regulation 6/2002 -A110P1 : point 38
Regulation 6/2002 -C1 : point 36
Regulation 6/2002 -C2 : point 36
Regulation 6/2002 -C3 : point 36
Regulation 6/2002 -C4 : point 36
Regulation 6/2002 -C5 : point 36
Regulation 6/2002 -C6 : point 36
Regulation 6/2002 -C7 : point 46
Regulation 6/2002 -C10 : points 4, 26, 27, 29, 38
Regulation 6/2002 -C12 : point 28
Regulation 6/2002 -C14 : point 57
Regulation 6/2002 -C19 : point 16
Regulation 6/2002 -C31 : point 39
Directive 2008/95 -A05P1LE : point 44
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0342 : points 34, 60
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0342 -A06P1 : points 59, 60
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0342 -A06P2 : point 60
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0342 -A09P1 : point 35
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0342 -A10P2 : point 60
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0342 -C9 : point 35
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0342 -PT8.2 : points 35, 38, 39
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0342 -S9 : point 38
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51993PC0344 -A07P1 : point 36
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51996PC0066 : point 36
Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51999PC0310 : point 36
Court of Justice - Opinion C -299/99 -N34 : point 43
Court of Justice - Opinion C -299/99 -N36 : point 43
Court of Justice - Opinion C -299/99 -N37 : point 43
Court of Justice - Opinion C -299/99 -N38 : point 43
Court of Justice - Judgment C -299/99 : point 43
Court of Justice - Judgment C -299/99 -N81 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -299/99 -N82 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -299/99 -N83 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -299/99 -N84 : point 45
General Court - Judgment T -9/07 -N72 : point 60
General Court - Judgment T -153/08 -N47 : point 58
General Court - Judgment T -153/08 -N48 : point 58
Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/09 -N53 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/09 -N54 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/09 -N55 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/09 -N56 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/09 -N57 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/09 -N58 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -281/10 -N53 : point 57
Court of Justice - Judgment C -281/10 -N59 : point 57
Court of Justice - Order C -290/10 : point 22
General Court - Order T -98/10 : point 22
General Court - Judgment T -315/12 -N61 : point 58
General Court - Judgment T -337/12 -N25 : point 58
Court of Justice - Judgment C -205/13 : points 59, 64
Court of Justice - Judgment C -215/14 -N44 : point 44
Court of Justice - Judgment C -215/14 -N45 : point 44
Court of Justice - Judgment C -215/14 -N55 : point 44
Court of Justice - Judgment C -215/14 -N56 : point 45
Court of Justice - Judgment C -30/15 -N39 : point 44
Court of Justice - Judgment C -30/15 -N53 : point 44
Court of Justice - Judgment C -361/15 -N124 : point 57
Court of Justice - Judgment C -361/15 -N125 : point 57
Court of Justice - Judgment C -361/15 -N62 : point 28
Court of Justice - Judgment C -551/15 -N42 : point 24
Court of Justice - Opinion C -397/16 -N38 : point 38
Court of Justice - Judgment C -247/16 -N31 : point 24
General Court - Judgment T -306/16 -N43 : point 60

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

15/07/2016

Date of the Opinion

19/10/2017

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

08/03/2018

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Judgment: OJ C 161 from 07.05.2018, p.8

Application: OJ C 419 from 14.11.2016, p.26

Name of the parties

DOCERAM

Notes on Academic Writings

Hackbarth, Ralf: Voraussetzungen für ausschließliche technische Bedingtheit eines Designs, Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht 2018 p.614-615 (DE)
Endrich, Tobias: Pinning down functionality in European design law – A comment on the CJEU’s DOCERAM judgement (EUGH Aktenzeichen C-395/16), Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht INT 2018 Heft 8-9 p.766-775 (EN)
Gielen, Ch.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2018 Afl.39 p.5422-5424 (NL)
Idot, Laurence: Propriété intellectuelle - Dessins ou modèles communautaires, Europe 2018, Mai nº 5, Comm. 202 (FR)
Endrich, Tobias: Pinning down functionality in EU design law - A comment on the CJEU's DOCERAM judgment (C-395/16), Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice 2019 Vol.14 N°2 p.156-167 (EN)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf - Germany

Subject-matter

General and final provisions
Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
- Designs

Provisions of national law referred to

Information not available

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

Reference for a preliminary ruling

Formation of the Court

deuxième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Jarašiūnas

Advocate General

Saugmandsgaard Øe

Language(s) of the Case

German

Language(s) of the Opinion

French