CONTEXT
A conflict that questioned the extent of the protection afforded to designations of origin
El Interprofessionnel Committee du Vin de Champagne (CIVC)The entity responsible for defending the protected designation of origin (PDO) Champagne detected the use of sign “Champanillo” to identify a chain of tapas bars in Catalonia, as well as its use in domains, social networks and promotional materials.
In the European Union, PDOs have a specific protection regime at Union level, set out in the Regulation (EU) 1308 / 2013, which guarantees its protection against misuse in all Member States.
The main legal challenge in this case lay in the fact that the products in question were not comparable to Champagne, but rather catering services, which raised a key question: Can there be an infringement of a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) when the sign is used for services and not for products?
LEGAL APPROACH
Protection should extend to those uses that evoke a memory in the consumer's mind
The case was framed around a central idea: the protection of designations of origin is not limited to identical or similar products, but should extend to those uses that generate a evocation in the mind of the consumer.
If the use of the distinctive “Champanillo” led the average consumer to think directly of Champagne, the protection should be activated, regardless of whether it was used to identify tapas bars and not sparkling wines.
Furthermore, that link in the consumer's mind also implied a misuse of reputation associated with the Champagne designation of origin: the mark benefited from the prestige, recognition and value built by the PDO.
This approach required going beyond traditional analysis and relying on the European framework (EU Regulation 1308/2013). Therefore, the case led to a preliminary ruling request submitted by the Provincial Court of Barcelona to the Court of Justice of the European Union, which proved decisive in clarifying and defining the limits of protection for designations of origin.
CASE DEVELOPMENT
A decade of litigation until the final decision
El The procedure lasted for almost a decade and went through several stages until consolidating that change of approach.
Following an initial unfavorable ruling in the first instance, the The Provincial Court of Barcelona referred the matter to the CJEUshifting the debate from the similarity between products to the concept of evocation.
Until that time, the Court of Justice had interpreted in several rulings - including the judgments of 7 June 2018, case C-44/17 and of 17 December 2020, case C-490/19 - the concept of evocation of a PDO, but had never ruled specifically on the question of whether the protection granted by designations of origin extends not only to behaviors related to products but also to services.
La response of the CJEU, in its judgment of 9 September 2021 (case C-783/19) was decisive. He confirmed that the protection of designations of origin also extends to services.provided that the use of the sign creates a sufficiently direct link in the consumer with the protected name.
Based on that criterion, the The Provincial Court reviewed the case and concluded that the use of “Champanillo” constituted an infringement by evocationTo this end, it did not limit itself to a nominal analysis, but assessed the set of circumstances: the clear phonetic and conceptual proximity between the signs, the incorporation of the term "champagne" in the controversial sign, its use in contexts linked to the consumption of beverages and, especially, the undue exploitation of the reputation associated with Champagne.
RESULT
The Supreme Court consolidates a criterion that redefines the scope of protection for designations of origin
On April 8, 2026, the Supreme Court fully confirmed the sentence issued by the Provincial Court of Barcelona, applying the doctrine established by the Court of Justice of the European Union. This brought the procedure to an end, consolidating the approach adopted.
Following the interpretation made by the CJEU, the judgment confirms that there is Infringement by evoking the Champagne PDO, even in the absence of identity or similarity between productsand that This protection also extends to services when the use of the sign creates a sufficiently direct link in the consumer's mind. It also confirms that this type of use can imply a misuse of reputation associated with the designation of origin.
Applying these principles, the Supreme Court confirms the order of cThat is in the use of the sign “Champanillo”, the withdrawal of materials and the cancellation of associated digital assets.
Beyond its specific effects, the ruling marks a milestone in the interpretation of the concept of the recall of Protected Designations of Origin (PDOs) in the Spanish legal system. The Supreme Court expressly incorporates the CJEU's criteria and integrates it into the national judicial practice, consolidating a standard that It broadens the scope of protection for designations of origin and strengthens their defense against indirect uses..
This ruling not only provides legal certainty, but also establishes a clear precedent for future cases, confirming that the protection of PDOs does not depend on the similarity between products, but on the ability of the sign to activate in the consumer an association with the protected designation.
Carlos Morán, partner in the Legal area
The case has been led by Carlos Moranpartner in the area Legal by ELZABURU, who has accompanied the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne since the beginning of the procedure, articulating the legal strategy throughout all its phases and contributing to the consolidation of this criterion.
His career in defending the Champagne PDO has been internationally recognized by the Champagne Committee itself, with the appointment of Knight of the Ordre des Coteaux of Champagne, a distinction that the Committee has awarded on several occasions to jurists who have stood out in the legal protection of this designation of origin at an international level.
