Although the third recital in the preamble to Directive 89/104 states that ‘it does not appear to be necessary at present to undertake full-scale approximation of the trade mark laws of the Member States’, the directive none the less provides for harmonisation in relation to substantive rules of central importance in this sphere, that is to say, according to the same recital, the rules concerning the provisions of national law which most directly affect the functioning of the internal market, and that recital does not preclude the harmonisation relating to those rules from being complete (Case C-355/96 Silhouette International Schmied [1998] ECR I-4799, paragraph 23; Case C-40/01 Ansul [2003] ECR I-2439, paragraph 27; and Case C-482/09 Budějovický Budvar [2011] ECR I-8701, paragraph 30).
Asia T-#/#: Yhteisöjen ensimmäisen oikeusasteen tuomioistuimen tuomio #.#.#- Union Pigments v. komissio (Kilpailu- EY # artikla- Kartelli- Sinkkifosfaattimarkkinat- Sakko- Asetuksen N:o # # artiklan # kohta- Rikkomisen vakavuus ja kesto- Suhteellisuusperiaate ja yhdenvertaisen kohtelun periaate- KumoamiskanneEurLex-2 EurLex-2