It follows that, when a non-member State, acting through its government, has made an application seeking to designate the EU in connection with an international registration of the contested mark, it places itself, through its own conduct, within the scope of Regulation No 207/2009 and thus becomes potentially subject to any of the absolute grounds for refusal laid down in Article 7 of that regulation. In other words, it is not a matter of the scope of EU law being extended to the non-member State, but of the latter voluntarily seeking the benefit of EU law.

It follows from the wording of Article 5 of Regulation No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark, which defines the scope ratione personae of Regulation No 207/2009, that any legal person, including a public law entity, may seek the protection of a Community trade mark. That applies not only to a company established in a non-member State but also to that State itself, which, whilst a subject of international law, is nevertheless a legal person established under public law for the purposes of EU law.

As regards signs or indications which may serve to designate the geographical origin or destination of the categories of goods, or the place of performance of the categories of services, in respect of which the protection of an international registration designating the Community is sought, especially geographical names, it is in the public interest that they remain available, not least because they may be an indication of the quality and other characteristics of the categories of goods concerned, and may also, in various ways, influence consumer tastes by, for instance, associating the goods with a place that may give rise to a favourable response.

Furthermore, the registration of geographical names as trade marks solely where they designate specified geographical locations which are already famous, or are known for the category of goods or services concerned, and which are therefore associated with those goods or services in the mind of the relevant class of persons, is excluded as, secondly, is the registration of geographical names which are liable to be used by undertakings and must remain available to such undertakings as indications of the geographical origin of the category of goods or services concerned. However, in principle Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 does not preclude the registration of geographical names which are unknown to the relevant class of persons — or at least unknown as the designation of a geographical location — or of names in respect of which, because of the type of place they designate, such persons are unlikely to believe that the category of goods or services concerned originates there or was conceived of there.

In the light of the above, a sign’s descriptiveness cannot be assessed other than by reference to the goods or services concerned, on the one hand, and by reference to the understanding which the relevant persons have of it, on the other. In making that assessment, OHIM is bound to establish that the geographical name is known to the relevant class of persons as the designation of a place. What is more, the name in question must suggest a current association, in the mind of the relevant class of persons, with the category of goods or services in question, or else it must be reasonable to assume that such a name may, in the view of those persons, designate the geographical origin of that category of goods or services. In making that assessment, particular consideration should be given to the relevant class of persons’ degree of familiarity with the geographical name in question, with the characteristics of the place designated by that name, and with the category of goods or services concerned.

(see paras 47-51)