Most of us are familiar with “Champagne” or “Bordeaux” wines. These are known as Geographical Indications (“GI“), which are signs or marks used to identify that certain goods originate from a particular region or territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the goods is essentially attributable to their geographical origin. In the intellectual property regime, GIs play an important consumer protection role, much like trademarks do, but are far less explored in terms of judicial consideration.
In Consorzio di Tutela della Denominazione di Origine Controllata Prosecco v Australian Grape and Wine Incorporated [2023] SGCA 37, the Singapore Court of Appeal (“Court“) considered an application for the registration of “Prosecco” as a GI in respect of wines in Singapore. This was the first time the Court of Appeal had to consider the operation and interpretation of various provisions under the Geographical Indications Act 2014 (“GIA“). The appeal concerned section 41(1)(f) of the GIA, which provides that a GI should not be registered if it contains the name of a plant variety or an animal breed and is likely to mislead the consumer as to the true origin of the product.
The Court allowed the application to register “Prosecco” as a GI, finding that the grounds of opposition had not been made out. In reaching its decision, the Court provided insight on how it would consider GI applications, the purpose of GI protection, and the proper approach to section 41(1)(f) of the GIA.
For more information, click here to read the full Legal Update.
