The Civil Court of Florence, Section specialized in business matters, ruled in the case registered at no. RG 10228/2018, with an interesting ruling on the subject of "distinctive signs and unfair competition“.
The case originates from the action brought by a person who claimed to be the owner of a property known as “Torre di Baratti” in the Municipality of Piombino and of a restaurant, with an adjoining bed and breakfast business, located inside the Tower. The plaintiff (who was later replaced by his heirs) sued the owner of the resort “Torre di Baratti-bio resort”, a tourist-accommodation facility built approximately 300 meters from the Gulf of Baratti.
According to the plaintiff, the defendant's structure, which reproduces the ancient "Torre di Baratti" in its name and effigy, improperly used the distinctive sign depicting the historic property owned by the defendant., also generating confusion among tourist customers, with diversion to their detriment. In particular, the plaintiff contested, among other things, the defendant:
- the invalidity of the registration of the trademark “Torre di Baratti-bio resort”, due to violation of the property rights on the property.
- the illicit use of the name and image of the Torre di Baratti.
Given that, in the specific case, the plaintiff did not appear to have registered or used the name or image of the tower as a trademark (or other distinctive sign), the Court rejected the plaintiff's claims, noting, among other things, that:
- The right of ownership on the Tower (which has not been proven), does not in itself confer the right to prohibit third parties from using a trademark having as its object the Tower itself.
- The fact that the Tower is a historic building does not in itself confer exclusive rights to the owner.
- There is no evidence of any asserted right to the name and image of the Tower.
The ruling is interesting because it reaffirms the fundamental principle (however controversial) according to which the ownership of a property, even if of historical interest, does not in itself confer on the owner an exclusive right on the name or image of the property; unless, of course, the conditions of protection of the image of the cultural property pursuant to art. 107 of the Cultural Heritage Code and/or the protection of the notorious civil sign pursuant to art. 8 of the Industrial Property Code apply.
Content edited by Prof. Avv. Paolo Cuomo
