ARCHIVESHISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(78)510
Vol.1978/0185

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement(CEE,Euratom)n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernantl'ouvertureaupublicdesarchiveshistoriquesdelaCommunauté économique
européenne etdelaCommunauté européenne del'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement(CE,Euratom)n°1700/2003du22septembre2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003,p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiés conformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
Inaccordance withCouncilRegulation(EEC,Euratom)No354/83of1February1983
concerningtheopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropeanEconomic
Community andtheEuropeanAtomicEnergyCommunity (OJL43,15.2.1983,p.1),as
amendedbyRegulation(EC,Euratom)No1700/2003of22September2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003,p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary,classifieddocuments inthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformitywithArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung(EWG,Euratom)Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar1983überdieFreigabederhistorischen ArchivederEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung (EG,Euratom)Nr.1700/2003vom22.September2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003,S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeit zugänglich.Soweit
erforderlich,wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenanntenVerordnungfreigegeben.

COMMISSION OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(78)510final
Brussels,9October1978
COMMISSION REPORTTOTHECOUNCIL
ONTHEDIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE ONTHEREVISION
OFTHEINTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FORTHEPRO­
TECTIONOFNEWVARIETIES OFPLANTS
/<1%
K-..-.t..'.
CCfl(7O)510final

CommissionReportontheDiplomaticConference ontheRevisionofthe
International ConventionfortheProtection ofNewVarietiesofPlants
I.Background
1.TheInternational Convention fortheProtection ofNewVarietiesof
Plantswasconcludedon2December1961.ThepurposeoftheConvention
istorecognizeandprotecttherightofthebreederofanewplant
1variety(breeder'sright).,Thebreeder'sriohtisdesignedto
guaranteebreedersrecompense-underapatent-fortheirbreeding
work.TheConventionlays'downinparticularthegeneralrules
governingeligibility forandthescopeofthebreeder'sright.In
anyMemberStateoftheUnionnationalsofotherMemberStatesenjoy
thesametreatmentasnationalsofthatStateasregardsrecognition
. . „ . 2andprotectionofthebreeder'sright(nationaltreatment).\" \■ ■ .
Atpresentten.countries,includingsevenCommunityMemberStates,
arepartiestotheConvention andthusconstitutetheUnionforthe
3Protection ofNewVarietiesofPlants(UPOV):
-CommunityMemberStates:Belgium,Denmark,theFederalRepublic
ofGermany,France,.Italy,theNetherlands andtheUnitedKingdom;
-othercountries:Switzerland,SwedenandSolitiiAfrica.
x •
2.Inrecent |yearsseveralcountries,includingtheUSAandCanadahave
expressedinterestinaccedingtotheConvention.Thisandother'
reasonshaveledUPOVtodraftproposalsforacompletelyrevised
versionoftheConvention,withtheaimof,,
-clarifyingcertainpointsinthetext
iand
-creatingconditionstomakeUPOVmoreattractivetopotential
4MemberStates-.
1
^Article1(1)oftheConvention
^Article3oftheConvention
•Article1(2)oftheConvention •
•ReportontheworkoftheCommitteeofExpertsontheInterpretation and
RevisionoftheConvention.

-3-
-3.On30January 1978 UPOV called aDiplomatic Conference ontheRevision
ofthe International Convention for the Protection ofNew Varieties
ofPlants'' for9to23October /tobeheld inGeneva .Invitations have
been issued to148non-member countries tosend "observer delegations "
and to15"observer organizations "tosend representatives tothe
conference .Among theobserver organizations istheEuropean Economic
Community .Thepurpose ofthe conference istoapprove and sign a
revised text ofthe Convention ,thebasis fordiscussion being the
proposals referred toinparagraph 2.
II.Community participation
1.' Hitherto the Community has not been directly involved inthe Convention .
Nor has ityetdeveloped aCommunity breeder 'sright .
.Ithas,however ,adopted legal instruments governing the free movement
ofquality seeds andpropagating material ,laying down rules forthe
official approval ofvarieties ,cultivars andthe like ofagricultural ,
horticultural andforestry plant species' *.
The conditions fortheapproval ofvarieties are largely thesame as
those which the UPOV member States apply under the Convention for the
Protection ofNew Varieties ofPlants .
Inparticulàr :
Council Directive 70/457/EEC of25September 1970 onthe common cata­
logue ofvarieties ofagricultural plant species (0JNoL225of
, .12.10.1970 ,p.1),aslast amended byDirective 78/55/EECof15
December 1977 (0JNoL16,20.1.1978 ,p.23);
'- Council Directive 70/458/EECof29September 1970 onthemarketing of
. ,vegetable seed (OJNoL225 of12.10.1970 ,p.7),aslast amended by
Directive 78/692/EECof25July 1978 (0JNoL236,26.8.1978 ,p.13);
- Council Directive 66/404/EECof14June 1966 onthemarketing of
forest' reproductive material (0JNo125of11.7.1966 ,p.2326 ),as
last amended byDirective 75/445/EECof26June 1975 (0JNoL196,
v 26.7.1975 ,p.14).
/ . / - .'

2.
-TheConvention oughtnot,atanyrateasregardsintra-Community
'trade,tobeallowedtoruncountertothelegislation embodied
inoradoptedpursuanttotheTreatyofRomeandinparticular
therules-laiddownintheTreatyregarding chefreemovementof•
goods(Articles30etseq.)andcompetition (Articles85etseq.);
-TheConvention mustnotbeincompatible withorunderminethe
principlesoftheabovementioned Communityrulesonthemarketing
ofseedsandpropagating material,inparticular,thescopeofthe
systemofthebreeder'srightandoftheprocedurefortheofficial
"acceptanceofvarietiesformarketingmustasfaraspossiblebe
/thesame,unlessttieirdifferent -purposesjustifyexceptions ;tov
this;
-TheConvention mustnotpreventthedevelopment oftheCommunity's
ownbreeder'srightwithintheframeworkoftheUnion;inviewof
suchadevelopment ofCommunitylegislation theConvention ,must
provideforthepossibility oftheCommunitytoacc.edetothe7
Convention assuch. , ^
-3.The*aboverequirements werehithertomettoalargeextent,because
themajorityofthemember.StatesoftheUnionwereboundbytheir
membership oftheCommunity.
Theproposedenlargement oftheUniontoanunspecified numberof
countriescouldchangethisposition.
^ ■ "■
ItthereforeappearsessentialthattheCommunityshouldinfuture,
participate intheworkrelatingtothe.Convention .
III,Commission proposalsforCommunityparticipation ■.
1.TheCommissionisconfiningitselfatthisstagetopresenting
proposalsto.theCouncilfortheparticipation oftheCommunityin
"therevisionoftheConvention,includingtheDiplomatic .Conference
.» *
tobeheldfrom9to23October1978.Itmaysubsequently propose
mea'surestobeadoptedaftertheconference .
*• '
Thepurposeoftheproposalsistopermitclosecooperation before
andduringtheconference betweentheMemberStatesandtheCommissiqn,
sothataharmonized approachcanbeworkedoutonallmatters
affectingtheCommunity.

The Commission therefore proposes :
that theMember States berequested toputforward orsupport the
solutions setout inAnnex IattheDiplomatic Conference ;
that the Member State chairing the Council berequested ,onbehalf
ofthe Community ,tomake astatement ofprinciples with regard to
the text ofthe Convention atthebeginning ofthe Conference ;a
draft' ofthis statement isatAnnex II;
that theCommission beempowered toappoint therepresentatives of
the Community ,which ,pursuant toRule 7oftheprovisional rules
oftheconference ,isinvited asan"observer organization ";
that the General Secretariat ofthe Council beinstructed to
arrange coordination meetings during the conference between the
Member States ofthe Community represented there andthe Commission

ANNEX1
SolutionswhichtheMemberStatesshouldputforwardorsupport
Onthebasisoftheproposals whichthecompetent UPOVCommitteeofExpepts
hasdrawnupandwhicharecontainedindocuments DC/3andDC/5and,as
regardsArticle13,indocument DC/4,thememberStatesarerequestedto
observethefollowingprocedurein.thediscussions onarevisedtextof -
theConvention :
1.Withregardtoprovisions whichconcerntheCommunity assuch,e.g.
Articles 1to14,17,29,30,31,32,34Aand38:
1.1*MemberStatesshouldessentially supporttheproposalscontained
ir*theabovementioned documents,bearinginmindthefollowing
.(1)remarks :
1.1.1.,Article3(3)entitlesmemberStatesoftheUniontore­
strict"nationaltreatment"tonationalsofothermember
StateswhichapplytheConventiontothesamegenusor
speciesandtonaturalandlegalpersonsresidentorhav­
ingtheirregisteredofficeinoneofthoseStates.
'MemberStatesarerequestedtosupportthisprovision
subjecttothereservation thattheythemselves mayapply
thisauthorization toUPOVmemberStateswhichalsobelong
totheEuropeanCommunityonlyinsofarasthisiscom­
patiblewiththeCommunityruleswhichprohibitdiscrimi-
>nationongroundsofnationality (Article7oftheEEC,
'Treaty).Ifthisprovisionisadopted,theabovereser­
vationshouldberecordedinthefinalactofthe
conference . -'
1.1.2._Article4(3)(a)requiresthatinaninitialphaseeach
memberStateoftheUnionapplytheConventiontoatleast
fivegeneraorspecies.
MemberStatesshouldpressforatextlayingdowncriteria
whichthefivegeneraorspeciesselectedbyeachMember
Stateshouldmeet.
(1)*• ' -
. .. ; -...Textualanalinguisticquestionsandmattersofpresentation (orderand
headings,ofthearticles)shouldotherwisebedealtwithasflexiblyas
possible.

1»1.2a .Article 5(2)lays down that thebreeder maymake his
agreement tothevariety being used dependent oncondi­
tions which helays down .
, Member States should press for atext which ensures that
the conditions laid down bythebreeder arecompatible
with current legislation . -
1.1.3 .Article 6(1 )(a)lays down that one oftheconditions
required forbreeder 'sprotection isthat thevariety
,,must beclearly distinguishable byoneormore important ,
characteristics from anyother variety whose existence
isamatter ofcommon knowledge atthetime when protec­
tion isapplied for .Itgoes ontolist examples of
ways inwhich this common knowledge "may"beestablished .
Under Community rules such distinguishing features are
similarly aprerequisite forofficial authorization of
avariety formarketing .Inthis connection thereference
collection (all thevarieties from which thenewvariety
must bedistinguishable )isdefined more clearly .Inthe
context ofbreeder 'sprotection ,distinguishing charac­
teristics must have the same meaning .
Themember States are therefore requested tosupport the
proposed provision with thereservation that they them­
selves may laydown rules ,persuant tothis provision ,
fordefining thereference collection inmore detail .
Iftheprovision isadopted ,theabove reservation should
berecorded inthe final act ofthe conference .
1.1.4 .Article 6(1)(b)(i)lays down theprinciple that the
variety must beanewone,butauthorizes member States
'of theUnion toallow uptooneyear 's"grace "formarket­
ingthenewvariety before protection isapplied for.
Member States are requested tosupport this provision .^
They should ,however /,agree beforehand that they will
take advantage ofthis "period ofgrace "only inagreement
with qach other and,where appropriate ,also with certain
other member States oftheUnion -inthelight ofthe
prevailing situation .There isnoneed forthis coordina­
tion tobementioned inthe final act ofthe conference .

- •-3-
■C"j - .1-1-5.Article 6(1)(b?(ii )lays down that avariety maybe -
... regarded asnewonly ifithasnotbeen offered for
sale ormarketed' intheterritory of .anyother member -
State oftheUnion forlonger than four or,insome
cases ,sixyears .
Itdoes not allow for the case inwhich the member
State oftheUnion inwhich theapplication forprotec­
tion issubmitted applies theConvention tothegenus
orspecies forthe first time after the' said period has
elapsed .Article 35does notappear cover this case
* ' *~~ ' - •*
adequately .
Member States arerequested tosupport this provision ,
.provided that theabovementioned case isdealt with
satisfactorily ,i.e. asolution isadopted whereby a
breeder inaMember State oftheCommunity canexpect
equal treatment ,andreciprocity between theother member
States oftheUnion isguaranteed inthis respect .
1.1.6 .Article 6(2 )lays down that protection may begranted
.only oncondition that thebreeder "has complied with the
>. ' * .....
"formalities "provided for bynational law .
These formalities could include requirements regarding
establishment ,registration orrecognition ofthebreeder
ortheappointment ofarepresentative resident inthe
State concerned .
Forthepurposes ofofficial acceptance ofavariety
formarketing .under Community rules ,thesole requirement
) s ,
.isthat thevariety have been obtained intheprescribed
manner within theCommunity ,notnecessarily intheMember
(2)
■ State ofacceptance .TheMember States arerequested
tosupport theabovementioned provision .They should ,.
„however ,agree beforehand that they will provide intheir
national laws foronly such "formalities "asare compatible
with theprohibition ondiscrimination provided for in
Article 7ofthe EECTreaty and -inrelations with Member ^
■<_ States oftheCommunity -donot runcounter tothesim­
plification ofofficial acceptance 6fvarieties under Com­
., munity rules .This coordination need notbementioned in
the final act ofthe conference .
(2) v
c.
Thecase ofvarieties from non-Community countries maybedisregarded here .

mLm
1.1.7 .Article 7lays down that eligibility forprotection
must beofficially verified .Theexamination must in­
clude official cultivation trials .
Aproposed explanatory note onArticle 7states that an
examination procedure which includes cultivation trials
undertaken bytheapplicant may,under certain conditions ,
beregarded ascomptaible with the UPOV Convention .
Member States are requested tosupport both theprovision
r andtheexplanatory note .They should ,however ,agree
.~ ■beforehand that atany rate inrespect ofspecies covered
bytheCommunity rules onthemarketing ofseeds and
propagating material they will notmake useofthepossibi­
lity ofnon-official cultivation trials forvarieties which
arenot intended exclusively fornon-member countries . ^
This coordination need notberecorded inthe final act of
the conference . •
1.1.8 .Article 9(2 )guarantees thebreeder equitable remuneration
inthe event that the free exercise ofthebreeder 'sright
isrestricted forreasons ofpublic interest inorder to
ensure thewidespread distribution ofthevariety .
Member States arerequested tosupport this provision .
They should ,however ,agree beforehand that thescope of
this provision maynot beextended beyond theoriginal
purpose (defence ,emergencies ,etc.)tqinclude cases in
which arestriction results from theapplication ofCom­
munity rules onthefree movement ofgoods orcompetition .
This coordination need not bementioned in -the final act
.ofthe conference .
1.1.9 .Thesecond sentence ofArticle 12(4 )specifies tha
- -<
various matters occurring during the "priority period do
notgive rise toanyright infavour ofathird party or .
toanyright ofpersonal possession .
"Member States arerequested tosupport this provision , '7
provided that asatisfactory solution isfound tothecase
where aperson acting ingood faith hasseed stocks when
thebreeder 'sright enters into effect .

-5-
1.1.10 .Arti c'le 15(A )(a) deals with the case where the
breeder 'sright inrespect ofthevariety andtrade-mark
protection for thevariety denomination coincide .It
Lays down that thebreeder may not,asfrom thetime when
thevariety denomination isregistere dcontinue toassert
hisright inorder tohamper thefree useof-thevariety
denomination .
, ^
The proposal contains three alternatives astothe terri­
torial scope oftheprovision .Thabreeder maynotcontinue
toassert his right
-inanymember State oftheUnion applying theprovisions
oftheConvention tothegenus orspecies towhich the
'variety belongs (alternative 1); '
-inthemember State concerned (alternative 2);
-inanymember State oftheUnion (alternative 3).
TheCommission regards alternatives 1and 2-atleast as
farastheMember States oftheCommunity areconcerned -
asincompatible with theCommunity rules onthefree move­
ment ofgoods .
Member States should therefore aim atasolution which
ensures that : .•
-thebreeder 'sright intheCommunity context serves no
other purpose than toprotect against unauthorized
(4) > ·.persons ;
-theobjective oftheCommunity rules onthemarketing
ofseeds andpropagating material ,inparticular regard­
ingthecommon catalogue ofvarieties ,including variety
denominations ,are notjeopardized .
% I '
1.1.11 .Article 13(5 ) lays down that avariety denomination
must bethe same inall member States ofthe Union .
Exceptions arepermissible only iftheauthority competent
fortheissue ofthetitle ofprotection "considers that
denomination unsuitable inthat State ".
j.vDocument DC/4
CfCommission Decision of21September 1978 relating toaprocedure
initiated pursuant toArticle 85oftheEECTreaty inrespect ofthe
right toprotection forvarieties ofmaize seed .
I

Member States should support theprinciple ofstandard
variety denominations .They arerequested tosupport
theproposed provision subject tothereservation that
^they maythemselves laydown criteria asregards unsuit­
ability ofavariety denomination inaccordance with the
development ofCommunity lawonthemarketing ofseeds
andpropagating material .Iftheprovision isadopted ,
thereservation should berecorded inthefinal actof
the conference .
.12.Article 15(6 )^laysdown that thecompetent authorities
ofthe member States ofthe Union shall inform each other
ofmatters concerning variety denominations ,including in
particular thesubmission ,registration andcancellation
,iofsuch denominations .
While supporting this principle ,theMember States should
endeavour tofind awording which makes clear that infor­
mation must besupplied notonly onthevariety denomination
submitted but also onother points which relate tothe
variety inrespect ofwhich anapplication forprotection
hasbeen submitted .This could beparticularly important
fordelimiting thereference collection ,when examining
whether anewvariety isdistinguishable from other varie­
ties according toArticle 6.
They should furthermore ensure that the rules ofprocedure
fortheexchange ofinformation ,including theexact con­
tents thereof ,arefixed atUnion level ,inthe light of
(orincombination with )therules applying toordeveloped
fortheofficial acceptance ofvarieties .
.13.Article 13(8)(b )^states that,inthecontext ofbreeder 's
rights ,thedenomination ofavariety istoberegarded as
thegeneric name forthat variety .
Noperson mayapply for,orobtain ,aright which could .
hamper thefree useofthedenomination .

Thealternatives fortheare§towhich theArticle should ^
apply arethesame asinArticle 13(4)(a *)^.
The solution depends onwhich alternative is .adopted for
the abovementioned Article .Member States should there­
(5)fore take into account theprinciples setoutabove .
ν .
1.1.14 .Article 15(9 )^permits theaddition ofatrade mark or
atrade name tothedenomination ofthevariety .
Member States should endeavour toobtain awording whith
> *
guarantees that theCommunity rules onthemarking ofseeds
and reproductive material are notaffected .These rules ■
donotpermit such additions ontheprescribed official
labels (agricultural seed andreproductive material ,certi­
fied vegetable seed ),suppliers' labels (basic vegetable
seed ,forestry reproductive material and all small packages )
oradhesive labels ormarkings used onpackages intheir
place^. Theproposal cannot therefore bteimplemented ,
except inpublicity ,ondocuments available separately
from thegoods orontheparts ofthepackage which are
clearly separated .from theprescribed marking ._
1.1.15 .Article 14(1 )states that the right accorded tothe
breeder isindependent ofthemeasures taken byeach
member State oftheUnion toregulate theproduction ,
certification andmarketing ofseeds andpropagating
material .
Member States should endeavour tofind awording which
makes itclear that the right accorded tothebreeder
isalso independent ofmeasures taken toregulate the
.acceptance ofvarieties formarketing .
Document 0C/4
See above 1.1.10
*Thereference tobreeding forconservation purposes isofnoimportance
here .

-8-
1.1.16 .Article 14(2 )states that themeasures referred toin
paragraph 1"shall ",,asfaraspossible ,avoid hinder - .
ingtheapplication oftheprovisions oftheConvention . s
Member States may support this provision ,but should -
agree inadvance that itdoes notform alegal basis
giving theConvention precedence over national orCom­
munity lawwhich hasbeen ormaybeadopted inthis
sector .
1.1.17 .Article 17(1 )defines theStates which may beinvited
asobservers tomeetings ofthe Council .
Member States should endeavour tofind awording guar-~
anteeing theCommunity regular representation inthe
Counci I. *
.1.1.18 .Article 29allows member States ofthe Union toconclude
special agreements among themselves fortheprotection
ofnewvarieties ofplants ,insofar assuch agreements
donotcontravene theprovisions oftheConvention .
Comparison ofthis provision ,which isnotdifferent from
thepresent text ,with thepresent text ofArticle 30(2 )
shows that itsscope isapparently limited .There isin
particular noguarantee that aCommunity breeder 'sright ,
created aspart ofCommunity legislative procedure ,
would becovered .
Member States should therefore endeavour toobtain a
wording permitting this . N
1.1.19 .Article 30(2 )refers toagreements between thecompetent
, authorities ontheexamination ofvarieties andtheassemb­
ling ofreference collections anddocuments .

-9-
Member States maysupport this provision ,butshould
*
agree inadvance that they will apply itonly insofar
asthecontracts are compatible with Community lawon
theofficial acceptance ofvarieties formarketing and
subject toafuture centralization ofCommunity trials .
1.1.20 .Article 31governs thesignature oftheAct .Allnine
Member States should sign . ./
1.1.21 .Article 32governs ratification oftheConvention' and
accession .Both are limited toStates .
Member States should press foratext which ensures that
accession oftheCommunity assuch ispossible atthe latest
X.
when aCommunity breeder 'sright isdeveloped .
1.1.22 .Article 34A(2 )grants derogation from certain clauses
ofthe Convention tomember States ofthe Union which
grant protection under patent legislation .
3 -
Member States may support this provision ,"provided that
itwill notapply inMember States oftheCommunity .
1.1.23 .Article 38lays down theprocedure for "Settling disputes
between member States ofthe Union .
Member States maysupport it,butshould agree inadvance
that disputes between member States oftheUnion which
arealso Members oftheCommunity will besettled atCom­
munity level .This agreement need notbeincluded inthe
final Act ofthe Conference .
1.2 .Ifamendments areproposed totheprovisions concerning the
Community assuch .Member States should ,intheir Opinions ,take
into account theremarks made under 1.1. *'

-10-
Iftheamendments proposed contain newpoints ofview ,they
should coordinate their attitude onthe initiative ofaMember .
State oroftheCommission intheproposed coordination meetings
2. Inthecase ofprovisions which donotinterest theCommunity assuch
(Articles 15,16,18to28,32A to34,35 .to37,39to41),Member
States should make every effort towork out acoordinated position .
.Theproposed coordination meetings should beconvened forthis purpose
onthe initiative ofone Member State .

AnnexII
Statementofprinciples bythe
-CouncilPrésident
Asrepresentative ofthecountrywhichisnotonlyoneofthefoundingmembers
oftheUnionbutalsocurrentlyoccupiesthePresidency oftheEuropean
Community/Ihavethehonour,onbehalfoftheEuropeanCommunitytomakethe
followingstatement:, ^" *
TheCommunity ,wishestoexpressitshighregardfortheworkdonetodatein
UPOV.Itwelcomesthisconference andsupportsitsaims;itapprovesthe
intentiontodraftanewtextoftheConvention,incorporating ,ontheone',
hand,necessaryclarifications androntheother,amendmentswhichwillimprove -
theworkingoftheConvention andenableotherStatestoparticipate withina
farwiderframeworkthanhitherto.IcanassureyouthattheCommunity Member
Statesrepresented attheconference andtheCommunityrepresentatives willdo
theirbesttomaketheconference asuccess.Theywillatthesametime
Ρ >·'„>'
naturallyensurethattheresultsachievedorsoughtinpursuanceofCommunity
agreements arenotjeopardized .;IreferinparticulartotheCommunity
principles .concerningnon-discrimination ongroundsofnationality,concerning
thefreemovementofgoodsandconcerning -competition andtotheCommunity
provisionsrelatingtothemarketingofseedsandpropagating materialof
agricultural ,horticultural andforestryplantspecies.
TheCommunityalsointendstodevelopbreeder'srights,withinthe^narrower '
contextoftheCommunity,withaviewtothefurtherelimination -ofnational
barriers.Itthereforehopesthataprovisionwillbeincludedinthe
Convention whichwillpermititsaccessionatalaterdate*It'.alsoin­
tendstoinvitethoseUPOVMemberStateswhicharefromthesameregion
butwhicharenotmembersoftheCommunitytoparticipate inthiswork
fromtheoutset.ThoseUPOVmemberStateswhichare*fromthesameregion
butwhicharenotmembersofourCommunitywillbeinvitedtoparticipate
inthisworkfromtheoutset.
Inconclusion,theCommunitywishestheconferencefruitfuldiscussion and
everysuccess.-