Scotch Whisky Association v. Klotz
European Union Court of Justice
Case No. C-44/17 (2018)
- Written by Jody Stuart, JD
Facts
The objectives of the Scotch Whisky Association (the association) (plaintiff) included protecting the Scottish whisky trade in Scotland and abroad. Michael Klotz (defendant), an online distributor, marketed a whisky called Glen Buchenbach. The whisky was produced by a distillery in Berglen, located in the Buchenbach valley in Germany. The whisky’s label included the name of the whisky and specified that the whisky was a German product that was produced in Berglen. The association brought an action in the German national court against Klotz, asserting that the use of the name Glen Buchenbach on a whisky that is not Scotch whisky infringed the protected geographic indication Scotch whisky. The association argued that because the word Glen is widely used in Scotland for the word valley and particularly as an element of trademarked names for Scottish whiskies, it evokes in the public an association with Scotch whisky. Klotz argued that the name Glen Buchenbach was a play on words based on the whisky’s place of origin, Berglen, and the name of a local river, Buchenbach. The national court requested a preliminary ruling from the European Union Court of Justice concerning the interpretation of Article 16(a)–(c) of Regulation No. 110/2008.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.