On 2 July 2025, the General Court of the European Union handed
down a landmark decision in Ferrari SpA v EUIPO (T‑1103/23),
reinstating the iconic TESTAROSSA trade mark and annulling the
EUIPO Board of Appeal’s earlier revocation ruling.

For brand owners operating in the luxury and heritage automotive
sectors, the judgment offers more than legal clarity because it
affirms the principle that genuine use is not merely a question of
volume, but of sustained economic relevance.

Background: The Road to Luxembourg

Ferrari’s TESTAROSSA mark, registered in the early 2000s,
faced a revocation challenge in 2015 under Article 58(1)(a) EUTMR.
The applicant, a German private inpidual, alleged non-use across a
broad range of goods, including vehicles and parts.

While the EUIPO Cancellation pision acknowledged limited
residual use, the Board of Appeal adopted a stricter
interpretation, concluding that no genuine commercial activity had
occurred during the relevant five-year period. Ferrari then
appealed to the General Court and has now prevailed.

Key Findings: What Counts as “Genuine
Use”?

The Court’s reasoning is grounded in established principles,
but its application to the luxury automotive sector is particularly
instructive and provides a number of guidelines.


Use by authorised dealers can qualify as genuine
use

Use by third parties, such as certified resellers, may constitute
genuine use – provided it occurs with the proprietor’s
consent and reflects an ongoing economic relationship.
Ferrari’s involvement in verifying and certifying the
authenticity of TESTAROSSA vehicles that were the subject of
resales was deemed sufficient to demonstrate active brand
curation.



After-sales services are central to proving genuine
use, not ancillary

Ferrari’s “Classiche” programme, offering technical
verification, certification, and restoration services, was
recognised as central to the brand’s continued commercial
relevance. In sectors where provenance and authenticity are
paramount, such services may serve as primary evidence of
use.



Spare parts sales support the parent
product

Sales of original TESTAROSSA spare parts were held to support the
classification of “automobiles”, not merely “vehicle
parts”. The Court emphasised that unless consumers perceive
parts as a distinct category, their sale reinforces the main
goods.

Implications for Brand Owners

This decision provides a roadmap for rights holders in the
luxury, heritage, and durable goods sectors:




Principle
When can it constitute genuine use?



Use by third parties
Must be with consent and economically linked to the brand
holder



Certification & after-sales services
Can form primary evidence of genuine use



Spare parts sales
Count towards use of the parent product unless viewed as
distinct products



Brand curation
Continuous oversight and stewardship are key


A Victory for Substance Over Formalism?

While the ruling is rooted in the specifics of the automotive
sector, its broader message resonates across industries. Trade marks today, especially luxury brands
and goods with a high value, live not only in advertising and
ledgers, but in ecosystems of resale, restoration, and reputation.
The General Court has recognised this stewardship and, in doing so,
reaffirmed the enduring value of thoughtful, strategic brand
management.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.