Wine Law

23 of the case has to be established. Detriment to the reputation would imply a tarnishing of the reputation, i.e. a real deterioration of the image of the prior trademarks. Unfair advantage would imply that the image of the renowned trademark which it projects are transferred to the goods covered by the subsequent trademark, with the result that the marketing of its goods or services is made easier by that association with the earlier renowned trademark 50 . Therefore, a trademark application for “Kenzo”, designating services related to wine sales and marketing has been refused registration in consideration of the “Kenzo” trademark, which benefits from a reputation for luxury fashion goods, since: “ (…) services falling within the wine sector may like clothing, perfumes and cosmetics, be part of the luxury sector. In addition, it is possible that proprietors of trade marks for cosmetics may also be active in the alcoholic drinks sector. (…) it was highly likely that the mark applied for would ride on the coat-trails of the earlier trade mark in order to benefit from the power of attraction, the reputation, the prestige of that mark and to exploit, without paying any financial compensation, themarketing effort expended by the intervener in order to create and maintain the mark’s image ” 51 . French law has equivalent national provisions, even prior to the implementation of the 2015 Directive. Thus, it has been ruled by the Court of Appeal in Angers that “Yquem” for various products such as washing powder, jewellery and clothing, is detrimental to the reputation of the trademark “Château d'Yquem”, which is extended far beyond the public who have the opportunity to consume the wine of Château d'Yquem, at a high price. Therefore, the renowned trademark was in a position to play a favourable role in the applicant’s field of activity. Furthermore, this use of the name of a locality in which the Château d'Yquem is located constitutes an unjustified exploitation of the trademark registered since the applicant had no connection with this locality 52 . 50 TEU 25 March 2009, L’Oréal – Spa Monopole T-21/07. 51 TEU 22 January 2015 kenzo Tsujimoto T-322/13. 52 Angers Court of Appeal, 7 June 1996 No. 9501433 (upon return after cessation).