• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patentanwaltskanzlei

Patentanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Walter Benjamin Feldheim
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

ECJ: Packaging dispute about Black Forest ham decided

19. December 2018

Whether Black Forest ham has to be cut and packaged in the Black Forest has to be decided by the national German court. Today’s ruling by the European Court of Justice is part of a battle that lasted 13 years over the packaging issue for foodstuffs protected by the EU designation of origin “Protected Geographical Indication”.

Packaging dispute by many instances

Black Forest HamThe name “Schwarzwälder Schinken” (i.e. Black Forest Ham) has been registered since 25 January 1997 as a geographical indication under Regulation (EC) No 123/97 in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 for ‘meat products’ at the request of the Schutzverband der Schwarzwälder Schinkenhersteller (Association for the Protection of Black Forest Ham Producers). In 2005, the Schutzverband applied to the DPMA for the specification of the protected designation “Schwarzwälder Schinken” to be amended in order to ensure that in future commercial slicing and packaging also took place in the Black Forest.

After all, a northern German company does the same – that cuts no ice with the Black Forest Ham Producers’ Association. Since 2005, it has therefore been trying to push through a more far-reaching specification of the regulations, according to which smoked meat must also be sliced and packaged in the Black Forest. For 13 years, a legal battle has been waged over this, which was decided today before the ECJ. The Federal Patent Court (BPatG) had taken the view that the general conditions for approval of an amendment to the specification had been met by the ECJ ruling on Parma ham in 2003 (see below, C-108/01). The Federal Supreme Court (BGH) had complained that there was no product-specific justification for this and in 2014 annulled the decision of the BPatG of 2011.

ECJ sees quality and authenticity guaranteed by packaging

slicing of hamThe ECJ recalled the judgment of 20 May 2003, Consorzio del Prosciutto di Parma and Salumificio S. Rita (C-108/01, EU:C:2003:296). It stated that controls outside the production area would provide fewer guarantees of the quality and authenticity of the product in question than controls carried out in the production area in accordance with the procedure laid down in the specification.

The EU regulations (Article 4(2)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, also Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1898/2006) must be interpreted as meaning that the requirement to present a product covered by a protected geographical indication in the geographical area in which it is produced is justified where it constitutes a necessary and proportionate means of preserving the quality of the product or ensuring its origin or the control of the specification for the protected geographical indication. Whether each is a necessary and proportionate means is a matter for the respective national courts to decide.

Judgment follows previous case law

The groundbreaking judgments of the ECJ in the cases “Proscuitto di Parma” and “Grana Padano” (judgment of 20.05.2003, Rs. C-108/01 and C-469/00) already interpreted the packaging question restrictively and allowed the processing steps of slicing and packaging by specifications in the specification only in the country of origin. Parma ham must not only be produced in Parma, it must also be sliced and packaged there. Spicy, this led to a Chinese interpretation of the judgment in the case of Parma ham. In 2011, the German newspaper Hamburger Abendblatt reported that a city called Parma had been founded in China without further ado – and that the matching ham had been brought to the domestic Chinese market.

 

Would you also like to protect your brand or trademark?

Then please do not hesitate to contact us. Our patent attorneys and attorneys at law are experienced and highly qualified in all areas of intellectual property law, both nationally and internationally.

Request your call-back without any obligations!

CAT-call_en

Sources:

ECJ C:2018:1025

Pictures:

MarkusHendrich /pixabay.com / CCO License    |  Ben_Kerckx /pixabay.com / CCO License  

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconInternational Intellectual Property,  Trademark Law Tag iconBlack Forest Ham,  case law,  ECJ,  Geographical indications,  Ham,  packaged and sliced,  Parma ham,  Protected geographical indications,  quality,  Schwarzwälder Schinken

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: International Intellectual Property

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • What is the public allowed to know? 3. June 2024
  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

3. June 2024
What is the public allowed to know?

What is the public allowed to know?

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

25. February 2022
CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks?

CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks?

24. February 2022
EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible

EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible

21. February 2022
CFI: Pumpkin seed oil + PGI symbol

CFI: Pumpkin seed oil + PGI symbol

15. February 2022
SPOTIFY v POTIFY – a ‘pot’ app

SPOTIFY v POTIFY – a ‘pot’ app

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

Newsletter INT

© Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf INT

Please note: If we deal specifically with your individual case, this is what is known as an initial consultation. In accordance with Section 34 of the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, this incurs one-off costs of 190 euros plus MwSt. We will be happy to assist you in a personal consultation after our telephone call.

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf

Um dieses Angebot nutzen zu können, müssen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten zustimmen. Wir behandeln diese streng vertraulich und verwenden sie nur zur Kontaktaufnahme mit Ihnen. Mehr dazu lesen Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

Bitte beachten Sie: Wenn wir uns konkret mit Ihrem Einzelfall befassen, ist dies eine sogenannte Erstberatung. Für eine solche entstehen gemäß § 34 Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz einmalige Kosten in Höhe von 190 Euro plus MwSt. Gerne helfen wir Ihnen im Anschluss an unser Telefonat in einem persönlichen Beratungsgespräch weiter.