Wine Law

8  and encourage mentioning sufficient distinguishing information to avoid confusion of consumers.” 33 . The coexistence of two homonymous geographical indications where there is no false representation or risk of confusion is also possible under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 34 . Article 100 provides that a name for which an application is submitted, and which is wholly or partially homonymous with a name already registered under EU law or protected under the national law of a Member State, can be registered with due regard for local and traditional usage, and any risk of confusion. On the other hand, a homonymous name that misleads the consumer into believing that products come from another territory cannot be registered even if the name is accurate as far as the actual territory, region or place of origin of the products in question is concerned. In any case, a registered homonymous name may be used only if there is a sufficient distinction in practice between the homonym registered subsequently and the name already in the register, considering the need to treat the producers concerned in an equitable manner and to avoid misleading the consumer. In case C-347/03 Tocai friulano 35 , Court of Justice of the EU held that the coexistence of homonymous names of wine under the above conditions 36 is only possible where each of the names constitutes a geographical indication. As the Italian names “Tocai friulano” and “Tocai italic” were not a protected geographical indication, priority was given to the Hungarian name “Tokaj”, which was protected as such. 4. Customary Names of Grape Varieties in Wine Labelling 4.1. International agreements Varietal wines are often referred to by the customary names of grape varieties from which they are produced. The international legal framework does not offer a single answer to the question whether such customary names should be treated as generic names for wine or whether they can be protected as geographical indications, and leaves the determination of this issue to individual countries. Article 24(6) of the TRIPS 33 M. Blakeney, p. 21; B. O’Connor, p. 49. 34 M. Blakeney, p. 206. 35 Judgment of the Court of 12 May 2005, Tocai friulano , case C-347/03, ECLI:EU:C:2005:285. 36 The Court's decision was based on equivalent rules contained in the EC-Hungary Association Agreement.