RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONIP/Q4/EEC/1
14 September 1998
(98-3465)
Council for Trade-Related Aspects
of Intellectual Property RightsOriginal: English/
French/
Spanish
REVIEW OF LEGISLATION ON ENFORCEMENT
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES1
The present document reproduces the questions put to the delegation of the European
Communities and the responses given in the review of legislation on enforcement at the Council's
meeting of 17-21 November 1997.2
_______________
I. REPLY TO QUESTION POSED BY HONG KONG, CHINA
The European Union Council (EC) Regulation (the Regulation) only contains measures
to prohibit the release for free circulation, import or export of counterfeit/pirated goods inMember States.  In order to provide sufficient and unified criminal legislation to MemberStates, will the European Community plan to introduce criminal laws relating to intellectualproperty rights into the Regulation?
Article 11 of Regulation No. 3295/94 provides that the Member States have to introduce
penalties to apply in the event of infringements relating to intellectual property rights covered by
Regulation No. 3295/94.  Such penalties must be suff iciently severe to encourage compliance with the
relevant provisions.
II. REPLIES TO QUESTIONS POSED BY JAPAN
1. Please indicate the "competent authorities" stipulated in Article 51 of the TRIPS
Agreement.
Article 3 of Council Regulation No. 3295/94 of 22 December 1994 provides that in each
Member State, the competent authority to receive applications for action must be a customsauthority (designated by the Member State itself).
2. Please explain whether "proceedings leading to a decision on the merits of the case"
stipulated in Article 55 of the TRIPS Agreement, are judicial or administrative.
                                                     
1 As regards laws and regulations relevant to th e area under review and notified by the European
Communities under Article 63.2 of the Agreement, reference is made to documents IP/N/1/EEC/1/Rev.1,
IP/N/1/EEC/E/1 and IP/N/6/EEC/1.
2 The minutes of this meeting have been circulated as document IP/C/M/16.IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 2
The provisions governing the "proceedings leading to a decision on the merits of the case"
vary according to the Member States.  These proceedings may be judicial or administrative.
3. Are there any ways other than the application stipulated in Articles 51 and 52 of the
TRIPS Agreement (hereafter referred to as "the Application") which enable a right holder torequest the competent authorities to suspend the release of the goods which infringeintellectual property rights or which are suspected to infringe intellectual property rights?
There are no other ways in the Community Regulation which enable a right holder to
request the competent authorities to suspend the release of the goods which infringe intellectualproperty rights or which are suspected to infringe intellectual property rights.
4. Please explain what term your country regards as "a reasonable period within which
the competent authorities shall inform the applicant whether or not they have accepted theApplication" stipulated in Article 52 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The Council Regulation does not provide for any precise period.  The only provision which
deals with this question (Article 3(5)) stipulates that the competent authority shall forthwith
(emphasis added) notify the applicant in writing of its decision.
5. Please explain the term during which the Application is effective.
It depends on the Member State.  Two years renewable in Germany and Austria;  one year
renewable in Spain and France;  one year in Sweden;  six months renewable in Luxembourg andPortugal;  six months renewable once in Belgium;  six months in Italy;  three months renewable inGreece;  three months renewable once in Denmark;  three months in Ireland; case by case basis inthe Netherlands, Finland and the United Kingdom.
6. Please explain whether a right holder is obliged to pay any fees to lodge the
Application.
It depends on the Member State.  The applicant may be charged a fee in certain Member
States (Denmark, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Austria, Portugal, Sweden and the United Kingdom).The amount of the fee varies according to the Member State concerned.
7. Please indicate provisions of laws and ordinances which prescribe the "proceedings
leading to a decision on the merits of the case" stipulated in Article 55 of the TRIPSAgreement.  And please summarize their contents.
See the reply to question 2.
8. Please explain the specific procedure, if any, to be applied to the goods which are not
evident whether or not they infringe intellectual property rights, in Article 55 of the TRIPSAgreement.
See the reply to question 2.
9. Please explain the responsibility that the competent authorities and other related
authorities take to the right holders when they fail to suspend the release into free circulationIP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 3
of goods which infringe intellectual property rights with regard to the suspension based on the
Application or the Ex Officio Action stipulated in Article 58 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The rules governing the responsibility that the competent authorities and other related
authorities take to the right holders vary according to Member States.  The applicable provisions arethose of the Member State where the application has been made (Article 9(1) of RegulationNo. 3295/94).
10. Please explain the responsibility that the competent authorities and other related
authorities take to the right holders when they examine goods which infringe intellectualproperty rights and nevertheless release them into free circulation with regard to thesuspension based on the Application or the Ex Officio Action stipulated in Article 58 of theTRIPS Agreement.
See the reply to question 9.
11. Please explain the responsibility that the competent authorities and other related
authorities take to the importers when they suspend the release into free circulation of goodswhich do not infringe intellectual property rights with regard to the suspension based on theApplication or the Ex Officio Action stipulated in Article 58 of the TRIPS Agreement.
 The rules governing the responsibility that the competent authorities and other related
authorities take to importers vary according to Member States.  The applicable provisions are thoseof the Member State where the application has been made (Article 9(2) of Regulation No. 3295/94).
12. Is the right holder informed of identities of the importers and consignors when the
competent authorities "suspend" the goods which infringe on intellectual property rights orwhich are suspected to infringe intellectual property rights, as well as the case where the rightholder is informed of identities of the importers and consignors stipulated in Article 57 of theTRIPS Agreement?
The first subparagraph of Article 6(1) of Regulation No. 3295/94 provides that the
competent authority shall notify the holder of the right, at his request, of the name and address ofthe declarant and, if known, those of the consignee so as to enable the right holder to ask thecompetent authorities to take a substantive decision.  However, this is subject to the application ofnational provisions on the protection of personal data, commercial and industrial secrecy andprofessional and administrative confidentiality.
13. Please explain the measures to protect confidential information in the course of the
inspection stipulated in Article 57 of the TRIPS Agreement.  And please indicate provisions oflaws and ordinances which prescribe such measures.
 Regulation No. 3295/94 does not lay down any rule in this respect.  This matter is dealt
with by Member States.
14. Please explain the procedures of detentions and seizures to be ordered by the
competent authorities based on Articles 51 and 55 of the TRIPS Agreement.
This technical matter is dealt with by Member States.IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 4
15. Please explain the procedures to appeal against any decisions ordered by the competent
authorities based on Articles 51 and 55 of the TRIPS Agreement.
This matter is dealt with by Member States.
16. Please explain the basis for calculating the security or equivalent assurance stipulated
in Article 53 of the TRIPS Agreement that the competent authorities may require an applicantwhen they suspend the release into free circulation.
According to Article 3(6) of Regulation No. 3295/94, the Member States may require the
right holder to provide security.  This security is to cover any liability on the part of the competentauthorities vis-à-vis the persons involved in an import or export operation where the procedure
(suspension or detention of the goods) initiated is discontinued owing to an act or omission by theright holder or where the goods in question are subsequently found not to be counterfeit or pirated.This security is also to ensure the payment of the costs incurred in keeping the goods under customscontrol (suspension or detention).  The rules governing the calculation of the amount of the securityvary according to Member States.
17. Please explain who shall pay the cost of detentions based on Article 51 of the TRIPS
Agreement or destruction stipulated in Article 59 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The calculation of the amount of the detention costs or the destruction costs as well as the
determination of the person liable are dealt with by Member States.  For example, depending on theMember State, the destruction costs may be attributed to the importer, the right holder or the Stateitself.  Sometimes, the national judge is the competent authority to decide.
18. Please explain what kind of cases are regarded as "the exceptional circumstances" in
which the competent authorities may allow re-exportation of counterfeit trademark goodsstipulated in Article 59 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Under Regulation No. 3295/94, the re-export of goods, in the unaltered state, found to be
counterfeit or pirated, is never possible.
19. Are there any procedures to lodge the Application which is valid in all EU Members
with regard to the suspension of the release into free circulation of goods which infringeintellectual property rights by the customs authorities?  If any, please explain the procedures.
There does not exist at the moment in the Community any procedure which would allow the
lodging of an application valid in all EU Members.  However, concerning the Communitytrademark, the Commission is currently considering the creation of a simpler procedure (singleapplication for action) applicable in all or several Member States depending on the request of theholder of the Community trademark.IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 5
III. REPLY TO QUESTION POSED BY NEW ZEALAND
Table 2 of document IP/C/W/75 (dated 14 July 1997),3 identifies for each Member
State of the European Communities a number of agencies under the heading "Filing ofComplaint".  We would be grateful to know whether this means that these agencies self-initiatecomplaints, or whether they are responsible only to receive complaints? In each case, could theEuropean Communities please specify whether private parties or the authorities areresponsible for initiating action to enforce protection of geographical indications.
Austria
The Austrian Wine Control Authority is responsible for all control activities based on the
Austrian Wine Law and the Common Wine Market Organization.  It also initiates complaints in any
case of suspicion.
If there is any kind of violation in the field of protection of geographical indications the
Austrian Wine Control Authority (whether informed by a private party or self-initiate) has to
withdraw the product from the market.
Producers selling wine with geographical indications not corresponding to national or
international legislative conditions have to be punished by the Austrian Regional Authority.  If the
producer does not agree with this punishment, the final decision has to be taken by court.
Belgium
Geographical origins are protected under Articles 16 to 21 of the Law of 14 July 1991 on
trade practices and consumer information and protection.
Legal proceedings may be initiated under Articles 95 to 100 of this Law.  The action may be
brought at the request of:
- those directly affected;- the Minister responsible for economic affairs;- a professional or inter-professional group with its own legal personality, excepting
when the proceeding concerns an act contemplated in Article 94 of theafore-mentioned Law (any act contrary to honest commercial practices by which a
vendor causes harm or may cause harm to the interests of one or several consumers);
- a consumer protection association with its own legal personality, provided that it is
represented on the Consumption Council or that it is duly recognized by the Ministerfor Economic Affairs, except when the proceeding concerns an act contemplated in
Article 93 of the afore-mentioned Law (any act contrary to honest commercial
practices by which a vendor causes harm or may cause harm to the professional
interests of one or several other vendors) (Article 98 of the Law of 14 July 1991).
The Economic Inspectorate, which is a departme nt of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, is
responsible for investigating violations of the Law on Trade Practices and Consumer Information and
                                                     
3 Document IP/C/W/75 contains the communication of the European Communities and their Member
States on the "Review of the Application of the Provis ions of the Section on Geographical Indications under
Article 24.2 of the Agreement".IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 6
Protection and the Minister may bring legal proceedin gs if the provisions of the Law are violated,
including those on geographical indications.
The Economic Inspectorate also receives complaints from any interested party (owner of a
geographical indication or consumer).
Commercial courts or magistrate's courts (criminal cases in the latter) hear proceedings
brought on the basis of the afore-mentioned Law of 14 July 1991.
Denmark
It should be noted that it is incumbent on the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, as
part of the general activities concerning food contro l, to ensure that the marketing of food does not
conflict with the general rules and regulations.
If the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration receives an application from the private
sector claiming that the use of a geographical indication is of such a nature as to mislead the public
regarding the actual place of origin of the product, the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration isunder a duty to pursue this matter in order to secure the protection of geographical indications.
Finland
The situation in Finland is that the Ombudsman and the supervisory authority initiate action
both in response to complaints and ex officio.  The Market Court initiates action in response to
complaints made by the Ombudsman or in certain cases by private parties.
France -  see below
Germany
Civil procedures are party procedures, i.e. the initiative and the progress of the proceedings
lies within the control of the parties of the litigation.  In this case, "competent agency" would be the
civil court of first instance which receives the complaint of the plaintiff.
Criminal procedures are initiated by the prosecuting authorities if there is sufficient factual
evidence for an offence.  With regard to the protection of wine geographical indications, prosecution
is ex officio, i.e. no request is required for initiating the prosecution.  But even where a request is
required, as for instance in the cases mentioned in Germany's answer to question 22 of the Checklist
of Issues on Enforcement,4 proceedings are only initiated if there is sufficient factual evidence for an
offence.  A request can be filed with the police,  the prosecuting authorities, or the Local Courts
(Amtsgerichte ).
Ireland
In the case of Ireland, the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs can initiate action in
response to consumer complaints or ex officio.  Courts of law take action in response to complaints
lodged.
                                                     
4 Document IP/N/6/DEU/1.IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 7
Italy
The entities cited in Table 2 under the title "Filing of Complaint" of document IP/C/W/75 of
14 July 1997, are normally entitled to receive, for their evaluation, complaints which can be presented
on the initiative of parties, either public or private, or by the same judicial authority directly.
The Netherlands
In the Netherlands, the relevant authorities (as indicated in the Warenwet  and the
Landbouwkwaliteitswet  such as the Inspectie voor de Gezondheidsbescherming ) initiate actions both
in response to complaints and ex officio.
Portugal
The authorities listed in Table 2 as receiving complaints do not have the authority to make
complaints themselves.  They are only responsible for receiving complaints.
Private parties and the official bodies administering the use of geographical indications may
initiate complaint proceedings.
Spain
For civil proceedings, the persons entitled to initiate action for the protection of geographical
indications are the natural or legal persons listed in document IP/C/W/75.
In criminal cases, either the Public Prosecutor's Office or, if there has been a criminal offence,
the judge, may initiate action.
Sweden
As indicated in an earlier communication concerning the protection of geographical
indications in Sweden, protection is ensured through the Marketing Act.  Actions under this Act are
instituted at the Stockholm City Court either by:
(a) the Consumer Ombudsman;(b) a businessman affected by the marketing; or(c) an association of consumers, businessmen or wage or salary earners.
The Court is not entitled to take action ex officio.  The Consumer Ombudsman may, on the other
hand, also take action without a complaint, i.e. on his own initiative.
United Kingdom
The situation in the United Kingdom is at the local authorities level and Wine Standards
Board initiate action both in response to complaints and ex officio.
France
Misuse of a geographical indication is punished under Articles L 115-5, L 115-16, L 115-17,
L 115-18, L 212-1 and L 217-6 of the Consumer Code.IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 8
The authorities, by initiating criminal action, are usually responsible for punishing misuse of
geographical indications.  Misuse of a geographical indication can also be contested in civil
proceedings.
When misuse of a geographical indication constitutes a criminal offence, the procedure is the
following:
(1) Any natural or legal person who becomes aware of misuse of a geographical indication may
bring the matter to the attention of the administ rative authorities responsible for applying the
Consumer Code la Direction Générale de la Concurrence, de la Consommation et de la
Répression des Fraudes  (DGCCRF) (Directorate-General of Competition, Consumption and
the Repression of Fraud).
This department will then undertake the necessary administrative investigation in order to
bring the offenders before the criminal courts, where appropriate.
Referral to the judicial authorities (public prosecutor) is on the basis of an administrative
document setting out all the facts of the case.
Pursuant to the general rules of French criminal law, the plaintiff's interests are usually
protected through the initiation of action by a public body, either the administrative
authorities or the public prosecutor.
During the proceedings, the plaintiff may obtain compensation for the prejudice suffered and
may become a " partie civile " in order to obtain damages.  The plaintiff does not have to be
represented by a lawyer.
(2) As part of their regular control activitie s, officials of the DGCCRF may, on their own
initiative, report any misuse of a geographical indication and, in accordance with the
conditions set out above, bring the matter to the attention of the judicial authorities.
Moreover, any person who claims injury as a result of the offence may lodge a complaint with
the examining magistrate, become a " partie civile " and initiate action by a public body.
The overall role of the police and the gendarmerie  is to receive complaints and, where
appropriate, inform the public prosecutor accordingly after carrying out an investigation.
In addition, the Institut national des appellations d'origine  (National Institute of Appellations
of Origin), the public administrative body responsible for supervising, promoting and
protecting appellations of origin, as well as for protecting the wine market and the economicregime governing alcohol, under the authority of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries,
may become a " partie civile " under Article 23 of the Decree-Law of 30 July 1935 on
protection of the wine market and the economic regime governing alcohol, published in the
Journal Officiel (Official Gazette) of 31 July 1935.
Article L 421-1 of the Consumer Code states that:
"Legally established associations whose specific statutory objective is to protect the
interests of consumers, may, if they are approved for this purpose, exercise the
recognized rights of the civil party in re spect to facts that directly or indirectly
prejudice the collective interests of consumers … ."
Pursuant to Article L 421-7 of the same Code:IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 9
"The associations referred to in Article L 421-1 may participate in proceedings before
the civil courts … where the purpose of the initial demand is to compensate for
prejudice suffered by one or more consumers due to acts that do not constitute a
criminal offence."
There are two procedures concerning geographical indications and appellations of origin:
(1) Any natural or legal person who becomes aware of misuse of a geographical indication may
bring the matter to the attention of the administ rative authority responsible for applying the
Consumer Code (the DGCCRF).
This department will then undertake the necessary administrative investigation in order to
bring the offenders before the criminal courts, where appropriate.
Referral to the judicial authorities (public prosecutor) is on the basis of an administrative
document setting out all the facts of the case.  In addition, any person who claims injury as a
result of the offence may lodge a complaint with the examining magistrate, become a " partie
civile " and initiate action by a public body.
Pursuant to the general rules of French criminal law, the plaintiff's interests are usually
protected through initiation of action by a public body either the administrative authorities or
the public prosecutor.
During the proceedings, the plaintiff may obtain compensation for the prejudice suffered and
become a " partie civile " in order to obtain damages.  The plaintiff does not need to be
represented by a lawyer.
(2) As part of their regular control activitie s, officials of the DGCCRF may, on their own
initiative, report any misuse of a geographical indication and, in accordance with the
conditions set out above, bring the matter to the attention of the judicial authorities.
In addition, the Institut national des appellations d'origine  (National Institute of Appellations
of Origin), the public administrative body responsible for supervising, promoting and
protecting appellations of origin, as well as for protecting the wine market and the economic
regime governing alcohol, under the authority of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries,
may become a " partie civile " under Article 23 of the Decree-Law of 30 July 1935 on
protection of the wine market and the economic regime governing alcohol, published in the
Journal Officiel  (Official Gazette) of 31 July 1935.
Article L 421-1 of the Consumer Code states that:
"Legally established associations whose specific statutory objective is to protect the
interests of consumers may, if they are approved for this purpose, exercise the
recognized rights of the civil party in re spect to facts that directly or indirectly
prejudice the collective interests of consumers …".
The referral to the examining magistrate may invo lve a civil party in order to compensate for
the injury caused.
The overall role of the police and the gendarmerie  is to receive complaints and, where
appropriate, inform the public prosecutor accordingly after carrying out an investigation.IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 10Contribution from France to Table 2 of Document IP/C/W/75 (see IP/C/W/75/Add.3)
Application of Section 3 of the TRIPS Agreement in Member States of the European Union
Interested parties Filing of complaint Investigating authority Final decision Content and penalties Appeal
France 1.  In criminal cases
- Any natural or
legal person;
-F r a u d
repressionservices
(DGCCRF)- DGCCRF
- Prosecutor
(publicprosecutor'soffice)
- Examining
magistrate
- Police/
gendarmerie- DGCCRF
- Prosecutor (public
prosecutor's office)
- Examining magistrate
- Police/ gendarmerie- Judicial
criminal
court- Emergency measures: attachment,
impoundment
- 2 to 4 years' imprisonment and/or
fines
- Publication/ notification
- Withdrawal of products
- Combination
- Destruction- Suspension of marketing
- Dissemination of information
messages
- Damages- Court of Appeal
- Court of
Cassation(appealsprocedure)
2.  In civil cases
- Injured party - DGCCRF - Civil Court
- Criminal
judicial
court
hearingcivil cases- Damages
- Cease and desist order under threat
of penalties- Court of Appeal
- Court of
Cassation
(appeals
procedure)IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 11
IV. REPLIES TO QUESTIONS POSED BY SWITZERLAND
1. The "Council Regulation (EC) No. 3295/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down measures
to prohibit the release for free circulation, export and re-export or entry for a suspensive
procedure of counterfeit and pirated goods" deals only with trademarks, copyright,
neighbouring rights and industrial designs.
Article 51 of the TRIPS Agreement provides that the WTO Members may provide for
border measures to other "infringements of in tellectual property rights".  Please indicate
whether the European Communities are envisa ging to extend such measures to patents,
geographical indications and topographies of integrat ed circuits.  If yes, please indicate the time
schedule for such extension.  If not, please indicate the Member countries (in addition to
Germany) which provide for a wider protection that that required by Council RegulationNo 3295/94.
Council Regulation (EC) No. 3295/94 only applies to trademarks, copyright, neighbouring
rights and industrial designs.  On 28 Januar y 1998, however, the Commission of the European
Communities adopted a proposal for amendment of the Regulation in order to extend its scope tocertain patents.
With regard to the situation in Member Stat es, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Greece,
Sweden and the United Kingdom have indicated that they apply the Council Regulation as such
without extending its scope.  The Netherlands legislation does not go beyond the protection providedin the Council Regulation either.  However, domestic case law has developed certain criteria which
offer the right holder of a patent or semiconductor broader protection than the Regulation.  These
criteria are developed inter alia  on the basis of "tort" (Article 6.162 of the Civil Code).
2. In Case 21-24/72 International Fruit Company et al. v Produkteschaap voor Groenten en
Fruit , the European Court of Justice has determined that GATT 1947 is not self-executing.  The
TRIPS Agreement contains a number of provisions which are very detailed and addressed to
the (judicial) authorities and not to the State itself.  Depending on the country's system
(monistic or dualistic), it is self-executing or not.  Since a number of countries may have
considered that the Berne or Paris conventions ar e self-executing, and considering the fact that
these conventions are incorporat ed in the TRIPS Agreement, wh at is the prevailing opinion
within the European Communities with regard to  the TRIPS Agreement as being self-executing,
if not as a whole, at least with regard to certain provisions?
With regard to the self-executing characte r of the TRIPS Agreement in the European
Communities, the attention of the Swiss delegation is drawn to the last "whereas" clause in the
Preamble of Council Decision No. 94/800 of 22 De cember 1994 approving the results of the Uruguay
Round.
5  This clause reads as follows:
"Whereas, by its nature, the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization, including
the annexes thereto, is not susceptible to being directly invoked in the Community or Member
State courts."
This clause applies to all parts of the WTO Agreement, including the TRIPS Agreement
(Annex 1C to the WTO Agreement).
                                                     
5 OJ No. L 336, 23.12.1994, p.1.IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 12
The question of direct applicability of cert ain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement has
recently been raised in the European Court of Justice with regard to Article 50.6.6  This procedure is
presently pending and the date for the judgment of the European Court of Justice has not yet been
announced.
3. As in Article 55 of the TRIPS Agreement, Article 7.1, second subparagraph, of Council
Regulation No. 3295/94 provides that the period of ten days may be extended by a maximum of
ten working days.  Although Council Regulation  No. 3295/94 is directly applicable in the
Member States, not all the Members have mentione d such possibility in their replies to the
Checklist of Issues on Enforcement.  Please explain the legal situation in the Member States
with regard to Article 55 of the TRIPS Agreement (and Article 7.1 of Council Regulation
No. 3295/94).
Council Regulation (EC) No. 3295/94 applies directly in all Member States of the European
Community.  Consequently, pursuant to Article 7.1 thereof, the period of suspension or detention of
suspect goods by the customs services is ten working days from the date of notification of the measure
in question.
This period may be extended by ten working days under certain circumstances specific to
each case, the decision being left to the discretion of customs authorities in each Member State.  As
the possibility of extension is contained in the Regulation, on principle no Member State may revoke
this possibility, for example through a general legal provision.
                                                     
6 Case C-53-96 – Hermès International v FHT Marketing Choice BV.IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 13
V. REPLY TO QUESTION POSED BY THE UNITED STATES
Please provide statistical information regar ding suspensions at the borders of the
Member States of counterfeit trademark/pirated copyright goods or in relation to goods where
other intellectual property rights are infringed.
Number of cases since 1 July 1995
Member State Latter half of
1995First half of
1996Latter half of
1996First half of
1997Total
Belgium
Denmark
GermanySpainFrance
Ireland
Italy
LuxembourgThe Netherlands
FinlandSweden
United Kingdom17
39 inc.
34 P and O T
214 inc.
11P
12 inc.
2 P and 2 T
196 inc.
7 P and 159 T
0
5
0NC
00
6528
23 inc.
17 P and 5 T
432 inc.
34 P
61 inc.
0 P and 10 T
86 inc.
4 P and 23 T
0
21
8117 inc.
26 P and 54 T
1
0
13740
48 inc.
18 P and 4 T
541 inc.
20 P
219 inc.
0 P and 127 T
105 inc.
0 P and 23 T
3
18
6135 inc.
40 P and 61 T
16
0
10842
29
657 inc.
12 P and 347 T
167 inc.
0 P and 104 T
140 inc.
11 P and 60 T
0
27
4138 inc.
63 P and 46 T
46 inc.
1 P and 12 T
5
177127
139 inc.
69 P and 9 T
1844 inc.
77 P and 347 T
459 inc.
2 P and 243 T
527 inc.
22 P and 265 T
3
71
18390 inc.
129 P and 161 T
63 inc.
1 P and 12 T
5
487
TOTAL 548 inc.
54 P and 161 T914 inc.
81 P and 92 T1239 inc.
78 P and 215 T1432 inc.
87 P and 569 T4133 inc.
300 P and 1037 T
NC = Not communicated
P = Postal consignments
T = Travellers' baggageIP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 14
Number of cases by type of goods concerned since 1 July 1995
Type of goods BE DK DE ES FR IR IT LU NL FI SV UK Total
Clothing
FootwearWatchesAudio
cassettes
Logos,
pendants,
badges,
emblems,
labels,
stickers
BagsMotor
vehicle parts
Sunglasses
Toys
Caps
Video gamesMicro-
processors
CDs
Videocassettes51
412
01
5
0
5
3
12
62
3
2119
06
00
0
0
2
1
0
150
10
11215
5279
12213
13
18
5
47
56
348
8
15123
26234
12
2
0
9
4
34
30
0
1305
2099
13
13
4
19
9
19
00
0
01
00
00
1
0
0
0
1
00
1
124
41
04
1
1
0
6
2
100
8
01
01
00
0
0
0
0
0
00
16
0195
549
312
11
0
6
0
22
212
22
14
90
02
3
0
1
1
1
20
1
05
00
00
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0330
025
033
8
0
0
8
8
13
10
02413
120506
12770
57
23
48
79
155
7325
79
21IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 15
Brief Overview
(1) 4133 cases were reported during the period in question (July 1995 – June 1997):
1844
527
487
459
390
139
127
7163
18
5
3   DE (44.6%)
   FR (12.7%)
   UK (11.7%)
   ES (11.1%)
   NL (9.4%)
   DK (3.3%)
   BE (3%)
   IT (1.7%)   FI (1.5%)
   LU
   SV
   IR
(2) Type of trafficking:
Of the 4133 cases:
  300 postal consignments (7.2%)
1037 travellers' baggage (25%).
(3) Type of products:
Of the 4133 cases:
2413 clothing (mainly T-shirts, shirts, jeans and sportswear) (58.3%)
  506 watches (12.2%)
  155 caps (3.7%)  127 music cassettes (3%)
  120 footwear (2.9%)
NB: 70 cases involved trademark symbols (logos, labels, sticker, badges etc.) (an
innovation of Regulation (EC) No. 3295/94).  Mo st involved considerable quantities.  For
instance, seizures in the UK included:
20 400 "Lacoste" logos (7 May 1996);
24 500 "Versace" logos (6 December 1995);60 000 "Nike", "Ralph Lauren" and "Y ves Saint-Laurent" labels from
Pakistan (17 October 1996);
75 000 "Levi's" logos, buttons and rivets (5 October 1995);75 000 "Ralph Lauren" and "Yves St-Laurent" labels from Turkey (14 March
1997);IP/Q4/EEC/1
Page 16
79 900 "Calvin Klein", "Timberland Ltd.", "Kickers" and "Ellesse" labels
from Pakistan (15 January 1997).
79 cases involved toys (mainly scale models, balls, cuddly toys etc.)
(4) The customs procedures and intellectual property rights concerned:
NB:  Such figures are available only for Italy from 1 July 1995; Germany, France and Ireland
from 1 January 1996; Belgium from 1 January 1997; and Denmark, Spain and Finland from
1 April 1997.
Of the 2165 cases concerned:
1517 release for free circulation (70%)
  383 unlawful import (17.6%)
  190 re-export (8.7%)
    64 placing under a suspensive procedure (2.9%)
      6 export (0.2%)
1962 trademarks (90.6%)
  206 copyright and related rights (9.5%)
  126 design rights (5.8%)
(5) Source of the counterfeit goods:
Of the 4133 cases:
  891 Middle and Eastern Europe
1359 Asia
  497 Turkey
  438 USA
  948 others
NB:  In Germany most cases involved products arriving from Poland, Turkey and the Czech
Republic.
In Spain most cases involved products arriving from the United States.
__________