Case C-27/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland) lodged on 18 January 2010 — Bureau National Interprofessionnel du Cognac
Date: 2010-01-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: alcoholic beverage, brand name, designation of origin, interpretation of the law, labelling, location of production, product designation, trade-mark law








C_2010063EN.01004102.xml










13.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/41





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland) lodged on 18 January 2010 — Bureau National Interprofessionnel du Cognac
(Case C-27/10)
2010/C 63/65
Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein hallinto-oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bureau National Interprofessionnel du Cognac

Other parties to the proceedings: Oy Gust. Ranin, Patentti — ja rekisterihallituksen valituslautakunta

Questions referred







1.


Is Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2008 on the definition, description, presentation, labelling and protection of geographical indications of spirit drinks and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 (‘Regulation (EC) No 110/2008’) applicable to the assessment of the conditions for registration of a trade mark, containing a geographical indication protected by that regulation, which was applied for on 19 December 2001 and registered on 31 December 2003?










2.


If the answer to Question 1 is affirmative, is a trade mark which inter alia contains a geographical indication of origin which is protected by Regulation (EC) No 110/2008, or such an indication in the form of a generic term and a translation, and which is registered for spirit drinks which inter alia in the case of their manufacturing method and alcohol content do not meet the requirements set for the use of the geographical indication of origin in question, to be refused as contrary to Articles 16 and 23 of Regulation (EC) No 110/2008?










3.


Regardless of whether or not the answer to Question 1 is affirmative, is a trade mark of the type described in Question 2 to be regarded as liable to mislead the public for instance as to the nature, quality or geographical origin of the goods or services, in the way referred to in Article 3(1)(g) of the First Council Directive 89/104/EEC (2) of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks, currently Directive 2008/95/EC (3) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version) (‘Directive 89/104/EEC’)?










4.


Regardless of the answer to Question 1, if a Member State has, on the basis of Article 3(2)(a) of Directive 89/104/EEC, decreed that a trade mark shall not be registered or if registered shall be liable to be declared invalid if the use of the trade mark can be prohibited by virtue of legislation other than the trade mark law of the Member State in question or Community law, is the view to be taken that, if the trade mark registration contains elements which infringe Regulation (EC) No 110/2008, on the basis of which the use of the trade mark can be prohibited, such a trade mark shall not be registered?






(1)  OJ 2008 L 39, p. 16.

(2)  OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1; OJ, Special Edition 1994, 13/Volume 17, L 178.

(3)  OJ 2008 L 299, p. 25.