# C_2018072EN.01001401.xml

| 26.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 20 December 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 8 de Barcelona — Spain) — Schweppes SA v Red Paralela SL and Red Paralela BCN SL, formerly Carbòniques Montaner SL

(Case C-291/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Trade marks - Directive 2008/95/EC - Article 7(1) - Exhaustion of the rights conferred by a trade mark - Parallel trade marks - Assignment of trade marks in respect of part of the European Economic Area (EEA) - Commercial strategy deliberately promoting the image of a single global trade mark following that assignment - Independent proprietors nonetheless maintaining close commercial and economic relations))

(2018/C 072/17)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 8 de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Schweppes SA

Applicant:

Defendants: Red Paralela SL and Red Paralela BCN SL, formerly Carbòniques Montaner SL

Defendants:

Other parties: Orangina Schweppes Holding BV, Schweppes International Ltd, and Exclusivas Ramírez SL,

Other parties:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7(1) of Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks, read in the light of Article 36 TFEU, must be interpreted as precluding the proprietor of a national trade mark from opposing the import of identical goods bearing the same mark originating in another Member State in which that mark, which initially belonged to that proprietor, is now owned by a third party which has acquired the rights thereto by assignment, when, following that assignment,

| — | the proprietor, either acting alone or maintaining its coordinated trade mark strategy with that third party, has actively and deliberately continued to promote the appearance or image of a single global trade mark, thereby generating or increasing confusion on the part of the public concerned as to the commercial origin of goods bearing that mark, |
| --- | --- |

—

the proprietor, either acting alone or maintaining its coordinated trade mark strategy with that third party, has actively and deliberately continued to promote the appearance or image of a single global trade mark, thereby generating or increasing confusion on the part of the public concerned as to the commercial origin of goods bearing that mark,

or

| — | there exist economic links between the proprietor and that third party, inasmuch as they coordinate their commercial policies or reach an agreement in order to exercise joint control over the use of the trade mark, so that it is possible for them to determine, directly or indirectly, the goods to which the trade mark is affixed and to control the quality of those goods. |
| --- | --- |

—

there exist economic links between the proprietor and that third party, inasmuch as they coordinate their commercial policies or reach an agreement in order to exercise joint control over the use of the trade mark, so that it is possible for them to determine, directly or indirectly, the goods to which the trade mark is affixed and to control the quality of those goods.

---

(1)  OJ C 305, 22.8.2016.

1

---