AG Opinion in Mast-Jagermeister case

Advocate General Kokott's opinion in Case C‑217/17 P Mast-Jägermeister SE v EUIPO was published on 22nd February and is available to read here.

The case concerns what information has to be provided in order for an RCD application to obtain a filing date. As AG Kokott (pictured) said: "Whilst the appellant, Mast-Jägermeister, considers that only certain technical requirements on the design are justified, EUIPO and the Court of Justice require that it be unequivocal also in terms of its content."

Having reviewed all the arguments thoroughly, she concluded that the General Court rightly required "that the representation of the design be precise as a condition for the accordance of a filing date pursuant to Articles 38(1) and 36(1) of the Designs Regulation" and proposed that the Court should dismiss the appeal.

The General Court decision was analysed by David Musker in a post on Class 99 last year. It was also discussed in the recent EUIPO webinar on design case law.

The CJEU judgment in this case can be expected later this year.

Posted by: Blog Administrator @ 17.11
Tags: Mast-Jagermeister, AG Kokott, Article 38(1), Article 36(1),

0 Comments    Post a comment