EU and Mercosur Trade Agreement - the lucky 20 (?)
Over the weekend, it was all over the news
that after 20 years of negotiation and talks the EU and Mercosur agreed to a
trade deal.
Mercosur is one of the largest trade bloc in South America
(Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay), the other been the Andean Community
(CAN) (Colombia, Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia). Since 2013, the EU agreement with
Colombia and Peru started to apply, and this was later on joined by Ecuador
(2017). This last EU agreement has seen how the market has gradually opened for
both sides and has increased an investment environment for the South American
countries involved. Bear in mind that the EU is the third largest trade partner
in the Andean countries -- you can
check the external link containing the fourth annual report (2018). If we go
back to the start of this agreement, you may recall that we talk about one of
the requirements imposed by the EU, that of Colombia to sign the Madrid
Agreement.
Was Brazil and the heavy pushy 2019 on the Madrid Protocol a
perfect clue for what was happening?
In Brazil we saw 2 public consultations: The registration of
marks as multiclass
trade marks: the Brazilian law does not allow for this. A multiclass trade mark
application is filed for the purpose of getting ONE trade mark registered under
two or more classes of products/services at the same time i.e. a multiclass
application rather than a single application (a registration per class – a
separate application must be filed for each class). The other hint was the open
consultation on co-ownership
and division of registrations and orders. Amusing to see in this latter
announcement, published on the 21st May 2019, a notice indicating that
shortly there was to be an open consultation on registration of marks under the
Madrid Protocol; although by next day, the Brazilian
Senate approved the Brazilian adhesion to the system. They did however
opened the consultation
on the 28th May.
I am looking forward to read the agreement and specially the
section ‘Intellectual Property, including Geographical Indications’. Now a
holistic approach is noted in section 13, here.
On trade marks it states that there is an important reference to the ‘Madrid
Agreement’ – does it mean that they will have to become members as the
Colombia’s example? But, then I read that in regards to patents, countries that
are not part of the Patent Cooperation Treaty are encouraged to sign – well,
this is directed to all except Brazil. So, no encouragement for Madrid then,
uh?. We of course cannot expect less from the EU counterpart to have an
‘ambitious’ on the topic of Geographical
Indications. And to be honest it appears to be quite balance if we compare with
the FTA between the EU and the Andean countries wh
ere there was a complete
unbalance. In this one, the EU listed 355 and the Mercosur 220.
Hold your breath, the agreement still needs to be ratified
by the national parliaments of all member countries of both blocs, as well as
by the EU Parliament and EU Council.
.jpg)
.jpg)
