Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/016/03

Decision date

18 December 2002

Hearing officer

Mr S Thorley QC

Mark

MEZZACORONA

Classes

33

Applicants/Respondents

Cantine Mezzacorona SCARL

Opponents/Appellants

Miguel Torres SA

Appeal to the Appointed Person in Opposition Proceedings

Result

Appeal referred to the court

Points Of Interest

• 1. Interpretation and application of Council Regulation 2392/89
• 2. Reference to the court under Section 76

Summary

At first instance the Hearing Officer had found against the opponents on all grounds, and had also refused a request for amendment of the grounds of opposition under Section 3(6) (see BL O/049/02). The opponents appealed to the Appointed Person - but subsequent to the filing of the appeal the Advocate General and the ECJ had dealt with a case (BORIE MANOUX - 24 October 2002) which concerned a question of interpretation of Council Regulation 2392/89, a regulation which had been cited at first instance but on which the appellants now sought to develop their case further. The Appointed Person therefore had to decide if the grounds of appeal could be amended, and whether to refer the matter to the court under Section 76. In the event he decided that the amendment of the appeal should be allowed; the question thus raised was one of general legal importance which, he decided, should be referred to the court.

He gave directions on the filing of additional evidence.