Wine Law

10 ● the sign has been refused registration to designate, inter alia , wines and spirits in class 33 19 , since it consists of a canteen bottle shape with some modifications that do not differ significantly from the old cantil shape, an industry standard. In this case, there were no additional elements, such as a denomination or a label. I.3. A Lawful Sign Pursuant to Article 7.1(f), signs that are contrary to the public policy or accepted principles of morality are excluded from registration. From this prohibition follows that of trademarks which include badges, emblems or escutcheons, whether or not they are covered by Article 6ter of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property [Art. 7.1(h) and (i)]. The grounds for refusal of Article 7.1(f) are applicable even if they apply in only part of the European Union. In such context, Public Policy “ refers to the body of EU law applicable in a certain area, as well as to the legal order and the state of law as defined by the Treaties and secondary EU legislation, which reflect a common understanding of certain basic principles and values, such as human rights ” 20 . Therefore, there is a wine public policy consisting in the body of law applicable in the wine sector. They are few case laws in respect of public policy. In the wine sector, the sign has been registered for Rum in class 33, since the relevant public will perceive the sign as provocative, transgressive, rebellious, but not as an indicator of criminal origin of the goods 21 . Principles of morality are not defined by EUTMR. Nevertheless, this concept: “ (…) refers, in its usual sense, to the fundamental moral values and standards to which a society adheres at a given time. Those values and norms, which are likely 19 TEU 24 September 2019 Fränkischer Weinbauverband T68/18 20 See EUIPO Trademark guidelines Part B, section 4.7 21 EUIPO, Boards of Appeal, 7 May 2015, R 2822/2014-5