RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONIP/Q4/NLD/1
14 September 1998
(98-3464)
Council for Trade-Related Aspects
of Intellectual Property RightsOriginal:  English
REVIEW OF LEGISLATION ON ENFORCEMENT
NETHERLANDS1
The present document reproduces the introductory statement made by the delegation of the
Netherlands, the questions put to it and the responses given in the review of legislation on
enforcement in the context of the Council's meeting of 17-21 November 1997.2
_______________
I. INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
General
The Netherlands adhered to their obligations under the TRIPS Agreement through existing
systems, which have been updated where necessary.  The judicial procedures were already in
conformity with the TRIPS Agreement partly beca use the Netherlands were already party to the
Conventions of Rome and Berne prior to the entr y into force of the TRIPS Agreement.  Being a
member of the EU, border measures are implemente d in accordance with EC Regulation No. 3295/94,
whose provisions are directly applicable in the Netherlands.
Judicial procedures
As can be seen in the answers to the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement,3 the Netherlands
offer an extensive and varied legal system of enforcement.  The provisions in the Code of Civil
Procedure are supplemented by additional rights and provisions in the Copyright Act.  Remedies
include declaratory judgements, court orders to abstain from infringements reinforced by conditionaldamages, or recalling illegal copies of material for destruction.  Injunctive relief can also be sought
through a specific procedure called the kort geding , which allows parties to put a case before the court
on very short notice.  The kort geding  is very popular in intellectual property right cases.
Provisional measures
Provisional measures, such as seizure, may be granted "inaudita altera parte' " provided that
full proceedings are commenced within eight to 14 days  of such seizure.  Defendant may revert to the
kort geding  to lift seizure, such kort geding  is held within a short period of time after seizure.
                                                     
1 As regards laws and regulations relevant to the area under review and notified by the Netherlands
under Article 63.2 of the Agreement, reference is made to documents IP/N/1/NLD/1/Rev.1 (Annex II) andIP/N/6/NLD/1.
2 The minutes of this meeting have been circulated as document IP/C/M/16.
3 Document IP/N/6/NLD/1.IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 2
Criminal offences
Several acts are punishable under the Criminal Code, such as import of goods bearing false or
falsified trademarks, or wilful violation of other persons' copyrights (especially if the aim is to obtain
commercial gain).
Border measures
Next to already existing provisions, such as Article 337 of the Criminal Code with respect to
trademarks, border measures are implemented in accordance with EC Regulation No. 3295/94.  The
provisions of the regulation are directly applicable.  Furthermore, additional measures are taken
following adherence to the TRIPS Agreement:  national legislation extending the criminal provisions,for instance by:
- aggravating penalties and upgrading the category of fines applicable to acts of piracy;
- penalties for import of goods that falsely bear an appearance similar to, or only
slightly different from, a model to which another person is entitled.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Netherlands are confident that their system, be it civil, administrative or
criminal, in all aspects meets the TRIPS requirements and offers a well developed and comprehensive
system of protection of intellectual property rights.
II. REPLIES TO QUESTIONS POSED BY JAPAN
1. Please indicate the "competent authoritie s" stipulated in Article 51 of the TRIPS
Agreement.
The competent authority in the Netherlands is the Customs Information Centre of the
directorate Customs of the Ministry of Finance.
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.
These proceedings are judicial.
3. Are there any ways other than  the application stipulated in Articles 51 and 52 of the
TRIPS Agreement (hereafter referred to as "t he Application") which enables a right holder to
request the competent authorities to suspend the release of the goods which infringe intellectual
property rights or which are suspected to  infringe intellectual property rights?
No, there are not.
4. Please explain what term your country regards  as "a reasonable period within which the
competent authorities shall inform the applic ant whether or not they have accepted the
Application" stipulated in Article 52 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The rules with regard to border measures in the Netherlands can be found in the European
Council Regulation No. 3295/94 of 22 December 1994.  This Regulation does not provide for anyIP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 3
precise period.  Article 3.5 of this Regulation stipulates that the competent authority shall forthwith
notify the applicant in writing of its decision.
5. Please explain the term during which the Application is effective.
In the Netherlands the legislation does not provide for a fixed period.  The length of this term
is decided on a case-by-case basis.
6. Please explain whether a right holder is obliged to pay any fees to lodge the Application.
No fees are charged for applications.
7. Please indicate provisions of laws and ordinances which prescribe the "proceedings
leading to a decision on the merits of a case" stipulated in Article 55 of the TRIPS Agreement.
And please summarize their contents.
See the Netherlands' answers to questions 1, 5 and 10 - 12 of the Checklist of Issues on
Enforcement.4
8. Please explain the specific procedure, if any, to be applied to the goods which are not
evident whether or not they infr inge intellectual property righ ts, in Article 55 of the TRIPS
Agreement.
There is no specific procedure for this situation (Article 7.1 of Council Regulation
No. 3295/94).
9. Please explain the responsibility that th e competent authorities and other related
authorities take to the right holders when they fail to suspend the release into free circulation of
goods which infringe intellectual property rights  with regard to the suspension based on the
Application or the Ex Officio Action stipul ated in Article 58 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The general rules on responsibility of the government are also applicable to the competent
authorities (Article 6:162 Civil Code).
Please explain the responsibility that th e competent authorities and other related
authorities take to the right holders when they examine goods which infringe intellectual
property rights and nevertheless release them in to free circulation with regard to the suspension
based on the Application or the Ex Officio Ac tion stipulated in Article 58 of the TRIPS
Agreement.
Please see the reply to question 9.
Please explain the responsibility that th e competent authorities and other related
authorities take to the importer s when they suspend the release into free circulation of goods
which do not infringe intellectual property rights with regard to the suspension based on theApplication or the Ex Officio Action stipul ated in Article 58 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Please see the reply to question 9.
12. Is the right holder informed of identiti es of the importers and consignors when
competent authorities "suspend" the goods which infringe on intellectual property rights or
                                                     
4 Document IP/N/6/NLD/1.IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 4
which are suspected to infringe intellectual proper ty rights, as well as the case where the right
holder is informed of identities of the importer s and consignors stipulated in Article 57 of the
TRIPS Agreement.
Article 6.1 of Council Regulation No. 3295/94 gives the Dutch competent authority the
possibility to inform the right holder.  However, because of national rules concerning civil servicesecrecy the competent authority does not provide information other than name and address of the
importer to right holders unless there is certainty about the infringement through a decision on the
merits of the case by judicial authorities.
13. Please explain the measures to protect conf idential information in the course of the
inspection stipulated in Article 57 of the TRIPS Agreement.  And please indicate provisions of
laws and ordinances which prescribe such measures.
It is forbidden for civil servants of the competent authority (Customs) to make public
confidential information on the basis of Article 67 Algemene Wet inzake Rijksbelastingen  (General
Tax Act).
14. Please explain the procedures of detentions and seizures to be ordered by the competent
authorities based on Articles 51 and 55 of the Agreement.
The procedures of detention and seizures to be ordered by the competent authorities can be
found in Articles 6 and 7 of Council Regulation No. 3295/94.
15. Please explain the procedures to appeal aga inst any decisions ordered by the competent
authorities based on Articles 51 and 55 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Appeal can be made against any of these decisions ordered by the competent authorities.
16. Please explain the basis for calculating the s ecurity or equivalent assurance stipulated in
Article 53 of the TRIPS Agreement that the co mpetent authorities may require an applicant
when they suspend the relea se into free circulation.
The basis for calculating the security or equivalent assurance is Article 3.6 of Council
Regulation No. 3295/94.
17. Please explain who will pay the cost of detentions based on Article 51 of the TRIPS
Agreement or destruction stipulated in Article 59 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The costs of detention of suspended goods will be paid by the right holder who lodges an
application.  The costs of destruction of counterfeit trademark goods and pirated copyright goods will
be paid by the administration.
18. Please explain what kind of cases are regar ded as "the exceptional circumstances" in
which the competent authorities may allow re-exportation of counterfeit trademark goodsstipulated in Article 59 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Neither Council Regulation No. 3295/94 nor Dutch legislation does provide the re-export of
goods in an unaltered state which were found to be counterfeit or pirated.
19. Please indicate which intellectual property rights are protected based on the Application
of the right holder.IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 5
Through Council Regulation No. 3295/94 are prot ected trademarks, designs, copyright and
neighbouring rights.
20. Please explain kinds and contents of documents which shall be provided by the applicant
to lodge the Application.
Kinds and contents of documents which shall be provided by the applicant to lodge an
application can be found in Article 3.1 and 3.2 of Council Regulation No. 3295/94.
III. REPLIES TO QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UNITED STATES
General obligations
1. In IP/N/6/NLD/1, in the response to question 2, the Government of the Netherlands
provides information with regard to enforcement of copyrights and patents but not withregard to other forms of intellectual property.  Please state with regard to trademarks,geographical indications, industrial designs, integrated circuit layout-designs, and undisclosedinformation, which persons have standing to assert rights and cite to the relevant provisions oflaw or regulation.
On the basis of Article 70 Patent Act (P A), Article 113 Uniform Benelux Trademark Act
(BTA), Article 14 Uniform Benelux Design Act (BDA), Article 17 Layout-Designs and IntegratedCircuits Act (LDICA) the subsequent right holders are entitled to assert their rights.
Geographical indications registered under the European Council Regulation 2081/92 can be
asserted by the right holder on the basis of Article 13 of the Regulation.  When geographical
indications are misleading interested persons can start civil procedures on the basis of Article 6:162
Civil Code or Articles 194-196 Civil Code.  One may file a complaint to the Public Prosecution
Service on the basis of Articles 328 bis and 337 of the Penal Code in case a geographical indication is
misleading.  When an geographical indication is used as a trademark and this indication is misleading
as to the source of the goods, interested persons and the Public Prosecution Service (ex officio) can
start civil procedures to invalidate this trademark (Articles 4.5 and 14 BTA).  The Benelux Trademark
Office has the authority to refuse registration of such a trademark (Article 6 bis BTA).
The LDICA allows licensees and pawnees to claim independent from the right holder
damages and profits cannot through violation of the right, if they have been granted such a right to
claim by the licensor.
2. Please identify any requirement that a foreign party must meet to initiate a proceeding
that is not required of a national or resident of the Netherlands and cite the legal authoritiesproviding for those differences.
The Code of Civil Procedure does not provide for additional requirements that a foreign party
must meet in order to initiate a proceeding that is not required of a national or resident of the
Netherlands.  Every plaintiff has to observe the rules set out in the Code and discussed in the
Netherlands' responses to the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement.
5
3. Please explain any provisions in the enforcement system in the Netherlands that ensure
expeditious remedies.  In addition, please explain what provisions are available to prevent
                                                     
5 Document IP/N/6/NLD/1.IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 6
deliberate delays by the parties to a proceeding and indicate the circumstances in which such
provisions will be applied.
The system in the Code of Civil Procedure is set out to ensure expeditious remedies for all
plaintiffs.  Reference is made in particular to the Netherlands' answer to question 6 of the Checklist of
Issues on Enforcement,5 where the kort geding  procedure is discussed.  In full proceedings all
submissions to the Court, including those for any extension of a time-limit for submission of writs or
evidence must be in writing and are decided upon by the court.  In general, requests to the Court for
an extension of a time-limit are granted when the opposite party approves of such an extension.
4. Article 41.3 of the TRIPS Agreement requires that decisions on the merits of a case
preferably be in writing, the better to determine the reasoning on which the decision is based.IP/N/6/NLD/1 notes that all court decisions must be motivated, stating the grounds for thedecision in full.  Please state whether judges or administrative officials must render theirdecisions in writing, give the time limit, if any, for rendering such decisions, and cite the legalauthorities requiring such written opinions.
All decisions of civil and administrative courts are in writing.  The Code of Civil Procedure
states that the registrar shall enter the text of a decision with the Official Registry of cases, which shall
be signed by the president of the court within 48 hours (Article 60) after such entry.  A written official
copy of the decision shall be made available by the Registrar to parties as soon as possible(Article 64) and the registry is liable for damages su stained as a result of not complying with this rule.
The decision of an administrative court will be in writing following Articles 8:66 and 8:67 of the
General Act of Administrative Law (Awb).
Civil and administrative procedures and remedies
5. Article 42 requires that defendants be notified of judicial and administrative
intellectual property enforcement proceedings brought against them.  Please describe theprocedures followed for notifying defending parties regarding proceedings that have beeninitiated against them, indicate the information provided regarding the proceeding and cite thelegal authorities establishing these procedures.
As described in the Netherlands' responses to the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement,
5 all
proceedings start by the serving of a writ of summ ons or official request on defendant.  The rules and
contents of the writs are set out in the Code of Civil Procedure, in particular Articles 1-17, 126 and429a-429t.  The summons must contain the facts and rights of the case on which plaintiff bases his
claim (the fundamentum petendi ) the claim itself ( petitum ).  It must also contain the date, names and
address of plaintiff, domicile chosen for the duration of the proceedings, name and domicile of the
official bailiff who serves the writ on defendant, name and domicile of defendant, name of the person
who has received a copy of the writ of summons when it was served, the court which is to hear the
case, the date and hour on which defendant is to appear in court, the name of the procureur,  and the
signature of the bailiff.  See Article 133 Code of  Civil Procedure.  Rules governing the proceeding
against an administrative body are found in Articles 8:26, 8:37,8.40 of the Awb.
6. Article 42 requires, with one narrow exception, that there be a means to identify and
protect confidential information during judicial and administrative intellectual propertyenforcement proceedings.  IP/N/6/NLD/1 states that care is taken not to require parties "todivulge trade secrets which are not relevant to the case" (emphasis added), which implies that
trade secrets relevant to the case will have to be divulged.  Please describe the means providedunder the law of the Netherlands for parties to identify and have protected confidentialIP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 7
information required to be presented in order to prove their claims and cite the legal
authorities providing for such identification and protection.
In the Netherlands, parties are generally free to decide whether or not to present information,
of whatever nature, which they feel proves their claims.  In civil law, both parties will have access to
all documentation presented to the Court.  This rule, set out in Article 24 of the Act on the
Organization of the Judiciary, is based on fundamental rules of fair trial, equality of arms, and the
Court's duty to listen to both sides of the argument.  This is in accordance with Article 1 of the
Constitution and Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights to which the Netherlands is
a party.
The Court may order that a case is not heard in public "for important reasons" which will be
stated in the official report of the hearing.  See Article 20 of the Act on the Organization of the
Judiciary and Article 429g of the Code of Civil Procedure.
For administrative proceedings, Article 8:29 Awb applies.  If a party considers certain
information to contain (trade) secrets which it does not want to be made public, it may request the
court to decide not to divulge this information to the other party.  Only the court will thus have
knowledge of the information.  The opposite party must expressly agree that it has no objections
against the use of the information in the decision.  Otherwise, the information will not be used by thecourt.
7. Article 43.2 provides that, in the event a party refuses to provide information ordered
by the judicial or administrative officials, those officials may be authorized to makepreliminary and final determinations adverse to that party.  IP/N/6/NLD/1 does not discussthe consequences if a party appearing in a witness hearing refuses to answer questions put bythe court.  Please describe what sanctions may be imposed on a party that refused to provideordered information and under what circumstances those sanctions are imposed, citing thelegal authority for those sanctions.
The Dutch system of evidence is based on the full freedom and authority of the Court to
decide upon (the value of) any evidence presented in Court (Article 179 of the Code of Civil
Procedure).  If confronted with a witness who refuses to answer, the Court may draw adverse
conclusions from such refusal.  See Article 179 paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.  Judicialdecisions with respect to evidence can be reviewed in a superior court case.  For administrative courts,
Article 8:31 Awb provides the same.
8. Article 44.2 provides an exception to the requirement in paragraph 1 for government
use or use by third parties authorized by the government, limiting the remedy forinfringement to payment of adequate remuneration as provided in Article 31(h).  Pleasedescribe any such limitations on remedies in the laws of the Netherlands and cite the legalauthorities providing for those limitations.
There is no special provision for this case.
9. Article 48.2 permits WTO Members to exempt public authorities and officials from
liability from remedies only where their actions were taken or intended in good faith incarrying out their responsibilities under the law.  Please explain any exemption providedpublic authorities and officials from liability for abuse of enforcement procedures, describe thecircumstances in which such limitations would not apply, and cite the legal authoritiesgranting such exemptions.IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 8
Public authorities and officials are expected at all times to act in good faith to carry out their
responsibilities under the law.  As described in the Netherlands' responses to the Checklist of Issues
on Enforcement,6 the employer (the State, regional or municipal authority) is responsible for the
conduct of its employees.  There is no exemption providing such authorities from liability for abuse.
An administrative authority may be liable for damages: the official could be fined or, in exceptional
cases, face criminal prosecution.
Provisional measures
10. Articles 50.3 and 50.8 require that judicial and administrative authorities be
authorized to require an applicant to provide evidence to establish with a sufficient degree ofcertainty that the applicant is the right holder and that infringement has occurred or isimminent.  With respect to each intellectual property right defined in Article 1.2 of the TRIPSAgreement, please describe the evidence required of right holders to establish ownership.
The plaintiff seeking provisional relief must satisfy the Court with a sufficient degree of
certainty that he is the right holder of an intellectual property right in order to have his request for
provisional measures granted.  The Code does not provide for a list of, or limitations on, the evidence
meant to establish such right, nor does it distinguish among the intellectual property rights.  The
decision lies with the Court.  See Articles 700-710 for the procedure to obtain permission for seizure.
Special requirements related to border measures
11. IP/N/6/NLD/1 states that amendments to the laws of the Netherlands are in
preparation to implement Regulation 3295/94 of the Council of the European Communities.Please explain the status of the implementation and provide a description of the bordermeasures that will be put in place.
This legislative proposal to modify the Penal Code, the Copyright Act 1912 and the Act on
Neighbouring Rights not only relates to Regulati on No. 3295/94 of the Council of the European
Union but also to the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property.  Article
337 of the Penal Code currently penalizes (in short) the import, the sale, the offer for sale, the delivery
etc. (of merchandise bearing an imitation) of another person's trade name or trademark.
7  Articles 31a
and 32a of the Copyright Act 1912 and Article 22 and Article 24 of the Act on Neighbouring Rightsgovern similar acts in regard to work falling under the protection of these laws (see previously
mentioned document, pages 10-11).  The legislative proposal adds import, sale etc. of "goods or parts
thereof that falsely hear an appearance similar to a drawing or model to which another person is
entitled, or an appearance only marked by minor differences" (Article 337, paragraph 1, subparagraph
e of the Penal Code now).  Furthermore, the range of prohibited acts is extended in the aforesaid threeActs by "transit" and "export" for the purpose of enhancing the possibilities of customs and other
criminal investigation authorities to combat imita tion and infringement of an intellectual property
right (piracy).  This modification was inspired by the Regulation.  The draft legislation was presented
to Parliament on 28 August 1997.  A further reading is expected to take place shortly.
                                                     
6 Document IP/N/6/NLD/1.
7 See the Netherlands' responses to the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement (document IP/N/6/NLD/1).IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 9
Criminal procedures
12. Article 61 requires that criminal penalties be sufficient to provide a deterrent at least
for wilful trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy.  Please explain how the penaltiesprovided under the laws of the Netherlands comply with that obligation.
Please see the Netherlands' responses to the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement
8 for an
overview showing that the Netherlands have introduced criminal penalties for wilful trademarkcounterfeiting and copyright piracy. The legislative proposal already discussed in the answer to
question 11 also contains further punishments.  Article 337 of the Penal Code shall include, as an
aggravating circumstance, committing the offence in the framework of a professional or trade activity.
This shall be liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding four years or a fine of the fifth category
f. 100 000).  This penalty already exists in respect of a violation of copyright or a neighbouring right(Article 31b of the Copyright Act 1912 and Article 23 of the Act on Neighbouring Rights.  In
addition, the penalties laid down in Article 31a of the Copyright Act 1912 and in Article 22 of the Act
on Neighbouring Rights will be increased up to the level of Article 337, paragraph 1 of the Penal
Code (term of imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine of the fifth category (f. 100 000).
[Follow-up questions from the US]
1. Please provide statistical information related  to civil copyright, trademark, geographical
indication, industrial design, patent, inte grated circuit layout-design and trade secret
enforcement for each of the years 1996 and 1997, including the number of cases filed;
injunctions issued; infringing products seized; infringing equipment seized; cases resolved
(including settlement); and the amount of damages awarded.
Statistical information provided by the Government of the Netherlands is set out in the
Annex.
2. Please provide statistical information relat ed to criminal enforcement in the area of
copyright piracy and trademark infringement fo r each of the years 1996 and 1997, including the
number of raids, prosecutions, convictions and the amount of fines and/or jail terms (including
whether the fines were paid and whether the jail term was actu ally served or was suspended)
and any other information establishing that your criminal system operates effectively to deter
copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting.
Statistical information provided by the Government of the Netherlands is set out in the
Annex.
                                                     
8 Document IP/N/6/NLD/1.IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 10
ANNEX
Statistical information in the area of intellectual property  1996/1997
Total number of complaints of trademark fraud
Of this total number it appeared that, after a preliminary
examination (M.I.A/Team 5) in cooperation with
trademark holders and/or representatives, there were
no infringements and therefore only for information: 
Remaining :
Of which :reports
reports of findings
statements of findings
correctedno infringements1996  
916  
628  
____-
288  
229  
8  
13  
9  
29  
____+
288  1997  
1071  
790  
____-
281  
148  
6  
15  
82  30  
____+
281  
See tables 1 and 2 (below) for specifications of the numbers of seized goods in 1996 and 1997.IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 11
Table 1
Seized goods 1996
EC Others Total
Lighters 5 093 15 000 20 093
Bracelets 0 9 9
Bath slippers 3 0 3
Suspenders 5 0 5
Caps 476 192 668
CD-playstations 183 0 183
CD-Roms 8 225 0 8 225
Computerlabels 90 0 90
Computer games 0 29 29
Creditcard holders 16 0 16
Buttons 716 0 716
Printed matter 0 9 9
Films 0 35 35
Necklaces 0 13 13
Pendants 0 9 9
Holographic pictures 9 800 0 9 800
Watches 301 1 917 2 218
Watch faces 1 000 1 500 2 500
Wooden gardenchairs 0 24 24
Intel processors 1 061 0 1 061
Jackets 535 0 535
Carton trademark boxes 500 0 500
Registration certificates 0 1 1
Clothing 0 462 462
Suitcases 4 0 0
Labels 17 542 17 17 559
Cuff-links 0 1 1
Maps 0 5 5
Trademark boxes 500 208 708
Hats 24 0 24
Earrings 0 9 9
Shirts 533 0 533
Perfume 450 0 450
Pencil sets 0 552 552
Polo shirts 301 0 301
Wallets 1 158 0 1 158
Belts 78 50 128
Rings 0 24 24
Shoes 32 0 32
fScarves 12 0 12
Shorts 144 0 144
Keyrings 98 0 98
Locks 0 1 1
Socks 69 0 69
Jeans 1 235 1 072 2 307
Stamps 0 1 1IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 12
Ties 161 0 161
Handbags 272 27 299
Track suits 218 669 887
Sweaters 611 591 1 202
T-shirts 1 442 2 227 3 669
Videotapes 32 0 32
Clockfaces 0 100 100
Silk-screen printings 0 13 13
Sunglasses 464 0 464
Total 53 382 24 767 78 149IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 13
Table 2
Seized goods 1997
Goods Number
various labels 150 000
business cards 80 000
various pieces of textile 67 337
lighters 60 300
CD boxes 51 391
boxer shorts 46 934
keyrings 36 900
shirts 24 511
CD-ROMs 22 907
money f 20 000
jeans/trousers 17 628
watches 13 647
CD trayx 9 600
wrapping foil 7 200
perfume 7 108
videotapes 6 963
CD cases 4 320
caps 3 527
shirts 1 977
music CDs 1 212
copper coloured nails for jeans 1 080
bags 1 005
jeans buttons 2 500
double CD cases 588
intels 500
statues 328
coats 238
bath slippers 225
blank CDs 171
scarves 140
trademark jeans tabs 140
jeans flashers 134
tickets for public transport 127
leather patches for jeans 133
washing labels for jeans 128
barcode labels for jeans 123
belts 91
shoes 78
gameboys 59
whisky 38
sunglasses 28
various children's clothing 28
rucksacks 25
mobile telephone cards 17
towels 14
various electrical appliances 13
mobile telephones 11
wallets 9IP/Q4/NLD/1
Page 14
TV screens 2
cars 2
cordless telephone charger 1
buzzer 1
TOTAL 650 000
__________