Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comment on the Italian Supreme Court Decision Fiorucci

Trade Mark Directive (2008/95/EC), Art. 6; Industrial Property Law (Legislative Decree 10 February 2005, No. 30), Art. 21

  • Case Note
  • Published:
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. CJEU, 30 March 2006, Case C-259/04, ECLI:EU:C:2006:215, Elizabeth Florence Emanuel v. Continental Shelf 128 Ltd.

  2. According to Trade Mark Directive 2008/95/EC, Art. 4(4)(c)(i) and Trade Mark Regulation 207/2009, Art. 53(2)(a), Member States may provide that a trade mark shall not be registered (or, if registered, shall be liable to be declared invalid) where the use of the trade mark may be prohibited by virtue of an earlier right to name.

  3. Legislative Decree of 10 February 2005, No. 30.

  4. In 1990, the Japanese group Edwin International acquired from Fiorucci Spa (the company of the designer Elio Fiorucci) various trade marks comprising the patronymic element “Fiorucci”.

  5. CJEU, 7 July 2011, Case C-263/09, Edwin Co. Ltd v. Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market and Mr. Elio Fiorucci, with comment by J. Phillips, “Clawing back a name”, in JIPLP, 2011, No. 11, p. 763.

  6. Decision of the Supreme Court of Cassation, I Civil Division, 25 May 2016, Case No. 10826, Edwin Co. Ltd et al. v. Fiorucci Elio et al. See this issue of IIC at doi:10.1007/s40319-017-0614-x.

  7. See M. Ricolfi, Trattato dei marchi. Diritto europeo e nazionale, Giappichelli, 2015, II, p. 1295.

  8. For a recent case concerning the use of the personal name “Alessi” in a company name working in the Italian design market, see Supreme Court of Cassation, I Civil Division, 8 January 2015, Case No. 3806, Alessi Spa v. Exclusive di Giacinto Alessi srl, with comment by R. Romano, “L’abuso del ‘diritto’ al nome civile nell’attività d’impresa”, in Riv. Dir. Ind., 2016, II, p. 120.

  9. See G. Sironi, “Comment sub art. 21”, in Vanzetti-Sironi (ed.), Codice della proprietà industriale, Giuffrè, 2013, p. 432.

  10. CJEU, 7 January 2004, Case C-100/02, ECLI:EU:C:2004:11, Gerolsteiner Brunnen GmbH v. Putsch GmbH.

  11. CJEU, 17 March 2005, C-228/03, ECLI:EU:C:2005:177, Gillette.

  12. Milan District Court, 18 September 2008, Edwin Co. Ltd et al. v. Elio Fiorucci et al., in Dir. Ind., 2009, 1, p. 40, with comment by M. Montesano, p. 48.

  13. Decision of the Supreme Court of Cassation, I Civil Division 29 December 2011, Case No. 29879, “AVC by Adriana V. Campanile”, in Foro it., 2012, I, col. 2804, with comment by G. Casaburi.

  14. Supreme Court of Cassation, I Civil Division, 24 May 2017 – Case No. 12995.

  15. Literally: “Supreme Court of Cassation, 25 May 2016 – Case No. 10826”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy

    Marco Bellia

Authors
  1. Marco Bellia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Bellia.

Additional information

For a translation of the Fiorucci decision by Marco Bellia, see this issue of IIC at doi:10.1007/s40319-017-0614-x.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bellia, M. Comment on the Italian Supreme Court Decision Fiorucci . IIC 48, 618–622 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-017-0613-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-017-0613-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation