This case concerns a person with a Facebook account. He uses it not only to exchange private photographs and chat with about 250 friends but also for publicity purposes. The legal issue is whether this latter activity stops him from qualifying as a ‘consumer’. The definition matters because if he is a consumer, then he and several thousand other Austrians who are aggrieved at Facebook’s use of their personal data will be able to sue in the Austrian courts. More
Case C-397/16, Acacia – the replica wheel deal
Acacia makes replica car wheels that fit Audis, BMWs, or Porsches. However, Acacia has been sued in several EU Member States and the defences it has raised are now the subject of three different preliminary references; two are from the Italian courts, and one is from the German Supreme Court. The central legal questions are whether Acacia’s replica wheels infringe EU-protected ‘design’ rights, and which court is competent to hear such a dispute? More
Case C-425/16, Raimund – mulling over infringement before invalidity in trade mark procedural law
The procedural law problem in this trade mark spice-mix case is whether the Austrian courts can simply cut a corner and consider in the context of an infringement-action whether a trade mark has been invalidly applied for rather than first considering whether the trade mark has been infringed and then its validity. More
Case C-289/16, Kamin und Grill Shop – an internet mail-order ‘direct sale’ barbecues consumer protection
Specialising in all-things-barbecue, the ‘Kamin und Grill Shop’ even sells a range of organic spice mixes. However, these have not been subject to a regulated ‘control system’ as required by the EU’s ‘organic produce’ Regulation 834/2007. Kamin und Grill deny infringing the Regulation because their business is done through their website, and the Regulation has an exception for ‘direct sales’. The unsavoury dilemma for the CJEU’s judges is this: if the aims of the Regulation are guaranteeing fair competition, ensuring consumer confidence and protecting consumer interests, then why is it legally right for an internet mail-order company to escape the wrath of the Regulation? More
Case C-393/16, Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne – against German Champagne Sorbet not from the French Champagne
‘Champagne’ said the wording on a box of German supermarket sorbet. ‘Champagne 12%’, echoed the list of ingredients. However, the supermarket’s sorbet is not from the Champagne area of France, and the commercial use of the word ‘Champagne’ is governed by the EU’s ‘geographical indication’ Regulations. More