Heritage or branding: Selling the past is trendy... but can it be misleading?

The validity of two national trademarks containing “Fauré Le Page Paris 1717” owned by Fauré le Page Paris (French luxury leather goods company) have been challenged on the grounds that they are allegedly misleading. 

Fauré Le Page traces its origins to a historic business dating back to 1716, but the current company was only created in 2009 and later registered trademarks including “1717.” Its competitor Goyard argued that this could mislead consumers into believing the brand has continuous heritage since 1717.

The Maison Fauré Le Page company had been engaged in the purchase and sale of weapons, ammunition, and leather accessories in Paris, France, since 1716, but was later dissolved in 1992, resulting in the transfer of its assets to its sole shareholder, Saillard. Fauré Le Page Paris is a company that registered in 2009. That year, it acquired from Saillard the French trademark “Fauré Le Page”. In 2011, Fauré Le Page Paris filed two French trademarks containing “Fauré Le Page Paris 1717” to designate “leather and imitation leather; trunks and suitcases; travel bags; handbags”.

Goyard challenged these trademarks before French courts, arguing that the reference to “1717” could mislead consumers into believing that Fauré Le Page has a long historical heritage and expertise dating back to that year, which is not actually the case as it was founded in 2009. The French Court of Cassation referred the matter to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), asking whether simply including a fictitious year in a trademark is enough to make it deceptive under EU law.

The CJEU ruled that simply including a year is not automatically deceptive. A trademark is considered deceptive only if it is likely to mislead consumers about the characteristics of the products or services (such as their origin, quality, or craftsmanship), not just about the brand owner itself. However, in the luxury sector, a claim of very old heritage can in practice influence consumer decisions. If consumers were to interpret the year as the company’s founding date and associate it with longstanding expertise, tradition and prestige - when such expertise does not actually exist - the trademark may be considered misleading.

Ultimately, it is up to the national court to determine whether the number “1717” mentioned in the trademarks for which cancellation is sought is perceived by the relevant public as a year of business establishment and suggests specific expertise, such as long-standing expertise, conferring a guarantee of quality and an image of prestige on the product for which the trademark is registered. In that context, the national court must examine each of the trademarks in their entirety, taking into account, in particular, the presence therein, in addition to the number 1717, of the term “Paris” as well as the message they convey to the relevant public.

CJEU, 26 March 2026, C-412/24, EU:C:2026:250, Fauré Le Page Maroquinier, Fauré Le Page Paris / Goyard St-Honoré