Wine Law

16 Italian IP Code. However, on the contrary, the violation of the designation of origin has not been recognised as an act of unfair competition, under Article 2598(1) of the Italian Civil Code, since, according to the Court, the challenged product was produced in the Chianti area and, as a consequence, the consumer shall not be confused with the different famous area of production of the region of Montepulciano. In any case, also in consideration of the reputation of the prior trademark, the Court has condemned the challenged company, also according Article 2598(2) of the Italian Civil Code, for an act of unfair competition for misappropriation of qualities. This significant decision shows that the registration of a designation of origin, as a collective geographical trademark, may grant a wider protection, which, in some cases, the Courts of merits may not recognise to designations of origin or geographical indications, taken into consideration alone. In any case, it is worth recalling that the abovementioned ruling is somewhat disputed for the concrete imbalance between the protection offered to the trademark, in respect with the designation of origin. That said on the most recent Italian case-law, it is worth mentioning the recent developments at a European level. In fact, as we have already analysed, the protection of designations of origin and geographical indications, across the different European countries, has been deeply influenced by the EU Regulations, Directive and also by the case-law of the European Court of Justice. Concerning wine DOs and GIs, the General Court of the European Union, with the ruling of 28 September 2017 (T-206/16), has confirmed the decision of the EUIPO Cancellation Division, which had refused the registration of the EU trademark application “Tres Toros 3”, in class 33, filed by a Spanish company, due to the existence of the prior Spanish designation of origin “Toro”, protecting a prestigious wine production of the Castile and León region, in particular in the area between the cities of Zamora and Valladolid. The Court has considered that consumers, also outside Spain, would immediately tend to associate the term “Toros” to the prior designation of origin, being the different elements “Tres” and “3” not likely to sufficiently distinguish the trademark from the “Toro” designation of origin, typical of Castilian full-bodied red wines.