The Audi Spare‐Parts Case (CJEU): A closer look at critical opinions

Abstract The present article is confined to the legal examination of the ‘critical opinions’ and the ‘misconceptions’ rendered or drawn with regard to a recent judgement of ‘Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)’ in a case, commonly known as ‘Audi Spare Parts Case’ (C‐334/22), whereby the CJEU has disallowed the use of a registered mark/sign (or a shape which is identical or similar to a registered mark/sign) on the spare parts of the car (or any complex product or machine for that matter) which interferes with the ‘essential functions’ of a mark/sign. The article summarily notes the involved facts and the legal context of the aforesaid case and then proceeds to analyse the congruity and the legal validity of the noted ‘critical opinions’, with the support of established legal principles, precedents, and statutory frameworks. The article also addresses and clarifies some misconceptions drawn with regard to the relevant legal concepts (of the Trade Marks Law), and concludes, in the wake of the findings of the legal analysis, that the Hon'ble Court has rightly upheld the intent and purport of ‘The Trade Marks Regulation’. At the end, the implications of the aforesaid judgement are also mentioned within a broader perspective, explaining their significance beyond the immediate context.