Sorry to contradict Alan, but I would regard that as fairly "bad" bokeh. I put the word bad in quotes, because for certain images this look can actually work well -- I even happen to like the donut bokeh from catadioptric (mirror) lenses sometimes, so call me a weirdo!
Anyway, "good bokeh" is generally accepted to mean that the blur circles are brighter in the centre than at the edges. If you look at the circle just to the lower right of the subject's earlobe, you can clearly see that the outer edge of the blur circle is brighter than the centre. This is perceivable in other bright spots elsewhere in the image. Where the background is more of a mish-mash, it looks a touch bitty and busy, rather than being a smoothly blended, indistinct dapple.
Note that some people worry more about the outer shape of the blur circles, and for this reason I've heard some people say that the Planar 50/1.4 has bad bokeh. They say that because it has only five diaphragm blades (in the C/Y AE version anyway) and hence gives a pentagonal shape to blurred highlight points. That may be true, but a mish-mash background without bright highlights is still rendered very smoothly because the brightness distribution isn't biased towards the edges of the blur areas.
Regards,
-= mike =-