C-539/03

Roche Nederland B.V. v Dr F.J. Primus and Dr M.D. Goldenberg

The following question has been referred to the Court of Justice of the European Communities for a preliminary ruling under the second paragraph of Article 234 EC:-

Is Article 5(1)(b) of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of Member States relating to trade marks (OJ 1989 L40, p.1; hereinafter ‘the Trade Mark Directive’) to be interpreted as meaning that there is a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public owing to the identity of the goods or services covered by competing signs in a case where an earlier word mark with normal distinctiveness is reproduced in a later composite word sign belonging to a third party, or in a word or figurative sign belonging to a third party that is characterised by parts of a word, in such a way that the third party’s company name is placed in front of the earlier mark and the earlier mark, though not alone characterising the overall impression conveyed by the composite sign, has an independent distinctive role with the composite sign?