Skip to main content
Log in

“Viiniverla”

Decision of the European Court of Justice (Second Chamber) 21 January 2016 – Case No. C-75/15

  • Decision • Trade Mark Law
  • European Union
  • Published:
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript
  1. 1.

    Article 16(b) of Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2008 on the definition, description, presentation, labelling and the protection of geographical indications of spirit drinks and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to assess whether there is an ‘evocation’ within the meaning of that provision, the national court is required to refer to the perception of the average consumer who is reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, that concept being understood as covering European consumers and not only consumers of the Member State in which the product giving rise to the evocation of the protected geographical indication is manufactured.

  2. 2.

    Article 16(b) of Regulation No 110/2008 must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to assess whether the name ‘Verlados’ constitutes an ‘evocation’ within the meaning of that provision of the protected geographical indication ‘Calvados’ with respect to similar products, the referring court must take into consideration the phonetic and visual relationship between those names and any evidence that may show that such a relationship is not fortuitous, so as to ascertain whether, when the average European consumer, reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, is confronted with the name of a product, the image triggered in his mind is that of the product whose geographical indication is protected.

  3. 3.

    Article 16(b) of Regulation No 110/2008 must be interpreted as meaning that the use of a name classified as an ‘evocation’ within the meaning of that provision of a geographical indication referred to in Annex III to that regulation may not be authorised, even in the absence of any likelihood of confusion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Author information

Consortia

Additional information

Official headnotes.

Available at http://curia.europa.eu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Viiniverla Oy v. Sosiaali- ja terveysalan lupa- ja valvontavirasto Regulation (EC) No 110/2008, Art. 16(b). “Viiniverla”. IIC 47, 499–500 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-016-0484-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-016-0484-7

Keywords

Navigation