Council Decision (EU) 2022/1222 of 12 July 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union in the Assembly of the Lisbon Special Union
Council Decision (EU) 2022/1222 of 12 July 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union in the Assembly of the Lisbon Special Union
Decision (EU) 2022/1222 · Decision · 3 articles
Data as of 2026-07-04 · Compiled from an official source version. Later amendments or repeals may not be reflected; the official text prevails. · Read the official text ↗
The position to be taken on the Union’s behalf in the meeting of the Assembly of the Lisbon Union in the framework of the WIPO General Assemblies from 14 to 22 July 2022 shall be to support the adoption of amendments to the Common Regulations as set out in Section 1 of the Annex to this Decision.
The representatives of the Union may also agree to modifications to the proposed amendments, provided they do not significantly alter the substance.
In preparation for the next session of the Lisbon Working Group, the Union shall submit a written proposal to the WIPO Secretariat suggesting amendments to Rule 5 of the Common Regulations, as set out in Section 2 of the Annex to this Decision.
ANNEX
Section 1:
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS to the Common Regulations under the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their International Registration and the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications
as recommended by the WIPO Working Group for the Development of the Lisbon System for adoption by the Lisbon Union in the framework of the WIPO General Assemblies 2022:
In the heading, ‘as in force onDecember 8, 2021
’ is replaced by ‘as in force on 1 January 2023
’.
Chapter II
Application and International Registration
Rule 7
Entry in the International Register
Implementation of Articles 29(4) and 31(1) of the Geneva Act
In Rule 7(4), subparagraph (a) is replaced by the following:
‘(a)
In case of the ratification of, or accession to, the Geneva Act by a State that is party to the 1967 Act, Rules 5(2) to (4) shall apply mutatis mutandis with regard to international registrations or appellations of origin effective under the 1967 Act in respect of that State. The International Bureau shall verify with the Competent Authority concerned any modifications to be made, in view of the requirements of Rules 3(1) and 5(2) to (4), for the purpose of their registration under the Geneva Act and shall notify international registrations thus effected to all other Contracting Parties that are party to the Geneva Act. Modifications relating to Rule 5(2) shall be subject to payment of the fee specified in Rule 8(1)(ii).’.
Rule 8
Fees
Amount of Fees
In Rule 8(1), point (ii) is replaced by the following:
‘(ii)
fee for one modification of an international registration 3 500
complementary fee for additional modification(s) submitted in the same request 300’
Footnote 3 is replaced by the following:
„ 3
For an international registration referring to a geographical area located in a least developed country (LDC), in accordance with the lists established by the United Nations, the fee is reduced to 50 per cent of the prescribed amount (rounded to the nearest full figure). In such case, the fee will amount to 500 Swiss francs for an international registration referring to a geographical area of origin located in an LDC, to 250 Swiss francs for one modification of an international registration referring to a geographical area of origin located in an LDC, and to 150 Swiss francs for a complementary fee for additional modification(s) submitted in the same request. These fee reductions will apply three years after the entry into force of the Geneva Act.”.
Chapter III
Refusal and Other Actions in Respect of International Registration
Rule 9
Refusal
Notification to the International Bureau
In Rule 9(1), subparagraph (c) is replaced by the following:
‘(c)
Unless demonstrated to the contrary by the Competent Authority referred to in subparagraph (a), the notification of an international registration referred to in subparagraph (b) shall be deemed to have been received by the Competent Authority 20 days after the date indicated in the notification.’.
Rule 15
Modifications
Permissible Modifications
Rule 15(1) is amended as follows:
1.
Point (i) is replaced by the following:
‘(i)
a modification of the beneficiaries consisting in the addition or deletion of a beneficiary or some beneficiaries, or a modification of the names or addresses of the beneficiaries or of the natural person or legal entity referred to in Article 5(2)(ii) of the Geneva Act’;
2.
Point (ii) is deleted.
3.
Point (vi) is deleted.
Rule 16
Renunciation of Protection
Withdrawal of a Renunciation
Rule 16(2) is amended as follows:
Subparagraph (a) is replaced by the following:
‘(a)
Any renunciation, including a renunciation under Rule 6(1)(d),may be withdrawn, in whole or in part, at any time by the Competent Authority of the Contracting Party of Origin or, in the case of Article 5(3) of the Geneva Act, the beneficiaries or the natural person or legal entity referred to in Article 5(2)(ii) of that Act or the Competent Authority of the Contracting Party of Origin, subject to the correction of the irregularity in the case of a renunciation under Rule 6(1)(d).’
Section 2:
Line to take in the written proposal suggesting amendments to Rule 5 of the Common Regulations:
Chapter II
Application and International Registration
Rule 5
Requirements Concerning the Application
In Rule 5, paragraph (4) is deleted.
Justification:
The proposed deletion of Rule 5(4) of the Common Regulations (Application Governed by the Geneva Act – Signature and/or Intention to Use) is justified as the signature requirement is already fulfilled and verified at the time of the initial application for registration. The requirements to declare the intention to use and to exercise control over the use contravene the constituent elements of appellations of origin or geographical indications. Appellations of origin and geographical indications are protected against any use infringing the recognised specifications, even if the products concerned are not marketed in the country where the fraudulent uses are detected. Moreover, their international registration necessarily presupposes control of their use within the Contracting Party from which they originate.
