Case No. IP-2018-000201

59.At the conclusion of the hearing I asked counsel to provide me with brief written submissions stating their respective clients’ views as to whether there should be a reference to the CJEU pursuant to art.267 TFEU. 60.Both parties submitted that if I reached the conclusion that the overall issue of law was not acte clair, I should make a reference. I agree. I understand that the question whether the marketing of a product or other event giving rise to the disclosure of a design must first happen within the EU in order for that design to be afforded UCD protection is a matter of widespread interest. Those interested would therefore benefit from an authoritative statement of the law by the CJEU. That includes and will continue to include parties who trade from within the UK. 61.At one time there would have been the option, often having merit in this court, to leave the question of a reference to be decided by the Court of Appeal should there be an appeal. But given the current circumstances consequent upon the notification by the UK under art.50 TEU, it is not likely that the Court of Appeal would ever be entitled to make a reference.