CJEU: Revocation of a trademark with a surname of a designer if the impression is given that the designer is still involved in the creation
22-12-2025 Print this page
Trade mark liable to mislead the public as a result of the use made of it. Trade mark corresponding to the name of a fashion designer. Assignment of the trade mark. Use of the trade mark in such a way as to make the public actually believe that the designer is still involved in the design of the goods bearing the trade mark. Articles 12 and 20 does not preclude revocation of a trade mark consisting of the surname of a fashion designer when that trade mark is used in such a way as to wrongly create the impression that the designer is involved in the design of the goods.
Case C-168/24 PMJC v JEAN-CHARLES DE CASTELBAJAC
The case concerns the revocation of trade mark rights within the meaning of Article 12 of Directive 2008/95 and Article 20 of Directive 2015/2436. The designer [W][X] claims that PMJC gives the public the impression that [W][X] still participates in the design of the goods, whereas this is not the case. It is unclear to the referring court whether the rights of a trade mark holder can be revoked on the grounds of deception.
Preliminary question:
Must Article 12(2)(b) of Directive [2008/95] and Article 20(b) of Directive [2015/2436] be interpreted as precluding the revocation of a trade mark consisting of the surname of a designer on the grounds that it is used after the assignment in such a way as to make the public actually believe that that designer is still involved in the design of the goods bearing the mark, when that is no longer the case?
Answer CJEU:
Article 12(2)(b) and (…) 20(b) [Trademark-directives] must be interpreted as not precluding the revocation of a trade mark consisting of the surname of a fashion designer on the ground that, having regard to all the relevant circumstances, it is used by the proprietor of the trade mark, or with his or her consent, in such a way as to lead the average consumer who is reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect to believe, mistakenly, that that designer was involved in the design of the goods bearing that mark.
IPPT20251218, CJEU, PMJC v Jean-Charles de Castelbajac
ECLI:EU:C:2025:986 and case C-168/24 PMJC v JEAN-CHARLES DE CASTELBAJAC
