La ECJ ha deciso Bainbridge: e come avevo sempre detto io l’argomento di molti avvocati italiani ed europei che dicono che siccome le loro norme interne dicono qualcosa… (co
me l’Italia che ha le registrazioni difensive), allora esse possono essere fatte valere in sede comunitaria, anche se contrarie a principi dichiarati dalla ECJ è crollato miseramente di fronte alla decisione della Corte di Giustizia, che ha riconfermato la supremazia non solo del diritto comunitario, ma anche delle decisoni della ECJ che prevalgono anche sulle norme interne.
Meditate gente, meditate….
2 commenti:
I don't think that the ECJ's judgment will really alter Italian law and the Italian trademark practice. It simply rules that Italian marks that are not subject to the use requirement in accordance with the defensive mark rule (Art. 24 (4)) may not be invoked in proceedings against CTMs under the Community Trademark Regulation 40/94. In other words, if, and only if, Italian marks are to be invoked against CTMs, they need to be used in accordance with the European use requirements. Otherwise, they may well continue to be used as before...
see my post on the same subject at http://servicemarks.blogspot.com
Best regards,
Marc
Thanks Marc! But allow me to disagree. I fail to see the reason why an Italian unused mark cannot be used against a CTM and can, instead be used against another Italian TM.
The requirement of use was not established by the CTM Regulation, but by the Directive 89/104. Therefore the question of use of all Italian marks must be assessed in light of the principles set by the ECJ. As you certainly recall, the ECJ in Ansul (C-40/01) clearly stated that “it follows both from the requirements of the uniform application of Community law and the principle of equality that the terms of a provision of Community law which make no express reference to the law of the Member States …must normally be given an autonomous and uniform interpretation throughout the Community; that interpretation must take into account the context of the provision and the purpose of the legislation in question."
Since the Italian TM law is the result of the Harmonization Directive, the Italian TM provisions must be interepreted in light of the principles stated by the ECJ and thus, it really does not matter against which mark the unused mark is opposed... if it is unused it will be equally invalid.
My 2 cents.
FA
Posta un commento