In a judgment delivered on Thursday 9 September (Case C-783/19), the Court of Justice of the EU reinforced the guarantees that protected designations of origin (PDOs) should enjoy, in line with the arguments of the French Champagne Wine Committee, which challenged the use of the term 'Champanillo' by a Spanish tapas bar operator.
Article 103(2) of Regulation 1308/2013 on the common organisation of the markets in agricultural products “must be interpreted as protecting PDOs in respect of conduct relating both to products and to services” (such as bars, in this case), the Court of Justice judgment reads.
The dispute originated in an action brought before the Spanish courts by the French Champagne producers, via the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (CIVC). The organisation is seeking to ban the use in Spain of the term 'Champanillo', or 'little champagne' in Spanish, on the grounds that it is both visually and phonetically reminiscent of the French PDO and thus seeks to profit from its reputation.
The Court noted that the tapas bar operator at the heart of the dispute uses this term “to designate and promote its establishments”. In addition, “in its advertisements it uses a graphic representing two glasses filled with a foaming drink”, it says.
On appeal, the Provincial Court of Barcelona sought an opinion from the Court of Justice of the EU on the interpretation of EU law applying to PDOs when a disputed term is used to designate services rather than products.
In its judgment, the Court emphasised that the EU rules “establish a very broad protection which is intended to extend to any use intended to take advantage of the reputation associated with products” benefiting from a PDO. Furthermore, the contested name does not have to be “identical or similar” for this EU regulation to apply. The “conceptual proximity” with the PDO may justify this challenge, the Court further states.
The Court concludes that Article 103(2) of the regulation must be interpreted as meaning that the ‘evocation’ referred to in that provision, first, does not require, as a preliminary condition, that the product protected by a PDO and the product or service covered by the disputed sign be identical or similar and, second, is established where the use of a name creates, in the mind of an average European consumer who is reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, a sufficiently clear and direct link between that name and the PDO.
It will be up to the Spanish judge to decide whether the word ‘Champanillo’ is indeed an infringement of the PDO ‘Champagne’.
French producers welcome the judgement. In a press release (https://bit.ly/3hgyhcV ), the CIVC states that this judgement “extends the scope of protection of PDOs in Europe and reinforces the exclusive link between the designation and Champagne wines”. It notes that the designation of origin is a consumer protection tool and a specific intellectual property right which designates a product from a specific region, the particular characteristics of which are the result of both the natural conditions of each region and the
know-how of local producers.
“While there are many designations of origin in most countries in the world, Champagne is among the oldest, best protected and most prestigious”, according to the statement.
Link to the judgment (in French): https://bit.ly/3jXNTUA (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)