Valpolicella Controversy, after the sentence of the Court of Venice, the Consortium speaks

“The Board of Directors of the Consorzio di tutela dei Vini della Valpolicella has unanimously decided to give full effect to the provisions of sentence no. 4333/2019 of the Court of Appeal of Venice, on the civil lawsuit brought on appeal by the “Le Famiglie Storiche” and its associated companies. On the merits, the sentence rejected the appeal of “Le Famiglie Storiche” (former Famiglie dell'Amarone d'Arte) and confirms in full and in all its parts what was established by the judgment at first instance”. Thus a press note of the Consorzio dei Vini della Valpolicella, led by Andrea Sartori, after the sentence of the Court of Venice, anticipated in recent days by WineNews, which ended the controversy that saw the opposition of the Consortium and the three companies of “The Historical Families” (Allegrini, Begali, Brigaldara, Guerrieri Rizzardi, Masi, Musella, Speri, Tedeschi, Tenuta Sant'Antonio, Tommasi, Torre d'Orti, Venturini and Zenato).

“The Consortium of Valpolicella, in considering it necessary to proceed on the basis of the principles and statutory duties attributed by the Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policies, considers as exemplary and destined to make international jurisprudence what has been ascertained by the sentence - explains the Consortium - in relation to the defense and protection of collective assets such as the denominations. The Consortium hopes that, from now on, there will be an awareness of each individual returning to discuss in a choral and more serene growth of a denomination among the most appreciated in the world”.

The Section specialized in business matters, chaired by Guido Santoro, confirmed, moreover, the acts of unfair competition, reiterated the prohibition to use the name “Famiglie dell'Amarone d'Arte”, as well as the consequent nullity of the trademark and of the so-called Manifesto dell'Amarone d'Arte. The obligation to remove the now null and void trademark from the labels and the obligation to publish the sentence in two of the main Italian newspapers remains, with costs to be borne by the defendants. Finally, the Court of Appeal also rejected the assessment of the validity of the private label made by the Ufficio Euipo (Office of the European Union for Intellectual Property).

As part of the appeal, together with the Consorzio di Tutela dei Vini della Valpolicella, were the companies: Roccolo Grassi, Zymè, Cantina di Colognola ai Colli, Cantina sociale di Soave, Cantina vinicola Sartori, Corte Figaretto, Corte Rugolin. Among the appealers, in addition to the association Le Famiglie Storiche, also the individual companies: Tedeschi, Begali, Brigaldara, Corte Giara (Allegrini), Guerrieri Rizzardi, Masi, Musella, Venturini Massimo, Speri, Tenuta Sant'Antonio, Tommasi, Zenato.