On the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the EU Trademark and Design Court, last week we analysed the evolution of this jurisdictional body. To continue this commemorative series, this week we will delve into the achievements made thanks to its specialisation. Over the years, the Alicante jurisdiction has built a solid judicial doctrine that has influenced European jurisprudence. In this article we will explore how specialisation has allowed the court to successfully address complex cases and establish itself as a reference in the field. Judicial specialisation: a palpable reality After twenty years it is clear that the dream of judicial specialisation in trademarks and designs of the European Union is a palpable reality. The construction of a jurisprudential doctrine by the Spanish court has been on a par, it must be said, with the extensive activity of the Court of Justice of the European Union, with around twenty pronouncements per year, mainly in matters of trademarks. But our court has also had some 'fault' in this. Of the 27 preliminary questions raised by Spanish courts, 6 come from Alicante. And some, such as the Cynologique judgment, which put an end to registration immunity, have marked new directions for litigation. The achievements and advances of the EU Trademark and Designs Court This specialisation to which we refer is manifested in the naturalness with which the Spanish court today adopts decisions that at the time were almost a chimera: precautionary measures against infringements on the Internet, which involve the blocking of web pages; the interweaving of the principles of good faith or abuse of rights, or the acts proper to infringement or nullity actions; the granting of compensation that, without becoming punitive, at least represents real satisfaction for the plaintiff, to give a few examples. It is not surprising that litigation before this court remains at high levels. According to statistics from the Higher Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), nearly a hundred cases were initiated in 2023 before the Alicante Courts in the field of Community trademarks. Despite its achievements, new challenges have arisen for this court which, despite its years of experience, seems to be constantly being tested. The ability to adapt and evolve in the face of these challenges will be crucial to maintaining its status as a benchmark in the protection of industrial property rights in Europe. We will discuss the court's new challenges in our next edition. María Cadarso, Associate in the Litigation Department at ELZABURU    

Following the recent anniversary of the EU Trademark and Designs Court, in our first instalment we explore how Alicante was chosen as the seat of this court. In this second installment, we will analyze the multiple transformations that the Court has experienced in its 20 years of existence. How it has evolved both in its structure and its jurisdiction and how it has become established as a benchmark in the protection of industrial property rights in Europe. Changes in the name and structure of the Court: a continuous evolution Over these twenty years, the Alicante Court specialising in trademarks and designs has undergone a constant evolution, manifested on three fundamental levels. First of all, it has changed its name several times. Initially known as the Community Trade Mark Court, it was later renamed the European Union Trade Mark and Design Court, and more recently the expression European Union Trade Mark Court of First Instance has come into use. These are not simple cosmetic changes; the latter name suggests a collegial action by the courts with jurisdiction in the matter, similar to the Patent Court of First Instance of Barcelona. The expansion of the Court: creation of new specialized bodies Another significant evolutionary aspect is the expansion of the jurisdictional body. Initially, only Commercial Court No. 1 of Alicante was responsible for disputes over trademarks and designs in the European Union, but Commercial Court No. 2 was soon added to these functions, and more recently, Commercial Court No. 4, which was newly created and also in Alicante. Only Court No. 3, located in Elche, has been left out of this specialized jurisdiction. This proliferation of courts may require a certain amount of collegial or coordinated action to avoid a lack of homogeneity, both procedural and substantive, despite how unusual this may seem in the judicial organization at first instance. Expansion of powers: new frontiers in the Jurisdiction The jurisdictional sphere has been the third level in which the Court has shown a notable evolution. Since its inception, one of the most relevant debates in litigation practice has been the scope of the jurisdiction of the European Union Trademark and Design Court. Originally limited to actions for infringement of European Union trademarks or designs, this restrictive approach was soon replaced by the application of the procedural principle of vis attractiveness. This allowed the Court to admit actions for the nullity of company names, infringement of national trademarks combined with other European Union trademarks, and actions regarding copyright linked to European Union trademarks. This interpretation was later supported by the legislator, converting what were initially jurisprudential criteria into normative criteria. An example of this is the recent Organic Law 7/2022, which reformed article 86 quinquies of the LOPJ. This development has allowed the court to concentrate on what is truly essential: building a solid judicial doctrine. In our next installment we will delve deeper into the achievements made thanks to this specialization. Ana Sanz, Associate Partner in the Litigation Area of ​​ELZABURU

This September 1st marks 20 years since the launch of the European Union Trademark and Design Court, based in Alicante. At ELZABURU, we have been closely involved in the launch of this jurisdictional body, where we have been involved since the first minute. For this reason, we will celebrate its Anniversary throughout the month of September with a series of articles that allow us to remember its development, achievements and the challenges it currently faces. We invite you to join us on this journey. The origin and evolution of the Court: How is the maturity of a jurisdictional body measured? Is it simply a matter of age? Should we heed the famous tango and think that twenty years is nothing? Two decades have passed since the launch of the European Union Trademark and Designs Court and the eponymous Court in the Alicante Provincial Court on 1 September 2004. The least that can be said is that in that time the new jurisdictional body has not only grown (in scope and number of cases) but has also reproduced itself (in number of courts) and is today in a more than reasonable state of health (due to the prestige earned by its rulings).  It's not all sunshine and rainbows, that much is clear. In any path it is impossible to avoid some shadows. But overall, as we will try to highlight, we are dealing with a newly created jurisdiction that has acquired a remarkable specialization and that represents for industry and business a not insignificant option when it comes to litigation.  Specialization as the key to the success of the Trademark and Design Court in Alicante. Much of the success of this unique jurisdiction is due to the decision made by the Spanish authorities at the time to opt for the creation of a single jurisdictional body, based in Alicante, to hear the actions derived from Regulation 40/94 on the Community trademark. This was not the only possibility that the new instrument offered to States, but the concentration of these lawsuits in Alicante was consistent with the location of the then Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) in that city and constituted a guarantee for faster and more effective specialization. The starting shot was none other than the bankruptcy reform of 2003, with the modification of articles 86 bis quadri and 82.4 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary by Organic Law 8/2003; but the goal was reached with Royal Decree 1649/2004, of July 9. This was the rule that agreed to assign the functions of Community Trademark Court to the Commercial Court No. 1 of Alicante and did the same with respect to the second instance with the Eighth Section of the Provincial Court of Alicante. Rafael Fuentes Devesa and Enrique García Chamón: pioneering magistrates of the Court Those who took up the baton at that time in the commitment to a new jurisdiction were Mr. Rafael Fuentes Devesa, who was in charge of the First Commercial Court, and Mr. Enrique García Chamón, president of the Eighth Section. Both judges, who still share a courtroom, left an indelible mark on the development of this judicial body. The international projection of the Alicante Trademark Court However, the bet of this Court was not without risk. The Community trademark system (a newly created title with a single registration and effects throughout the European Union) had come into force with the first applications in 1996 and judicial involvement was key to assessing the scope of the new instrument. Not in vain, the system contemplates, depending on the criterion of competence chosen, that a Spanish court extends its jurisdiction to the entire European Union since its rulings are effective in the rest of the countries. The truth is that in a short time the court inspired so much confidence that a clear migration of trademark litigation towards Alicante could be observed. But there was still a long way to go… We will leave its subsequent evolution for the next installment. Enrique Armijo, Partner in the Litigation Area of ​​ELZABURU

ELZABURU partner Antonio Castán gives a conference on the procedural perspective of the next Business Secrets Law. Date: 21.02.2019/18/00 Hours: 21:00 p.m. to 18:XNUMX p.m. Location: Editorial Reus, C/ Rafael Calvo, XNUMX, Madrid. More information: https://forodedebatejuridico.com/sesion/la-ley-de-secretos-empresariales-donde-una-perspectiva-procesal-singularidades-retos-y-estrategias/ Source: Reus-Elzaburu Author(s): Antonio Castán Perez-Gomez

ELZABURU partner Javier Fernández-Lasquetty participates in the seminar organized jointly by WIPO and OEPM where he will present alternative methods of IP dispute resolution: arbitration and mediation. Date: 21.02.2019/09/00 Time: 14:20 a.m. to 2019:2019 p.m. Place: OEPM. More information: http://www.oepm.es/es/sobre_oepm/agenda/01/18_XNUMX_XNUMX_Seminario_sobre_trabajos_intangibles.html Source: OEPM Author(s): Javier Fernández-Lasquetty Quintana