A tax on Sin? Posers for the Court of Justice

The IPKat's friends at the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) inform him that they have now received notification of a new case to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling: it's Case C-583/12 Sintax Trading. According to the IPO,
"The case is a request for a preliminary ruling from the from the Estonian Supreme Court which concerns an alleged infringement of intellectual property rights and which body is competent to determine this when goods are detained on this basis on arrival in the EU. It arises from a challenge brought by Sintax Trading against a decision of the Estonian Tax and Customs Office to detain their goods imported from the Ukraine on the basis that they infringed a similar bottle design already registered in Estonia".
This Kat duly clicked the link which, the IPO promised, led to the case itself and the questions referred forf a preliminary ruling, but he thinks he got there before they uploaded it since it wasn't there. Though the underlying litigation seems to be a design case, there's no note of it on the Class 99 blog either.  Fortunately the Kat's friend at EU Law Radar has lots of useful information, which you can enjoy here.

If you have any useful advice for the IPO concerning this reference, do email policy@ipo.gsi.gov.uk by 19 February.
A tax on Sin? Posers for the Court of Justice A tax on Sin? Posers for the Court of Justice Reviewed by Jeremy on Tuesday, February 12, 2013 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.