WRITTEN QUESTION E-0488/00 by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Admissibility of parallel imports.
Date: 2000-02-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: World Trade Organisation, distributive trades, economic consequence, electronic commerce, import (EU), import policy, industrial counterfeiting, trade-mark law

C 330 E/172

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

(2000/C 330 E/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0488/00

by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 February 2000)

Subject: Admissibility of parallel imports

Under Article 7 of the EU trade mark directive (89/104/EEC) (1) the (cid:145)European exhaustion(cid:146) principle has
trade mark legislation since 1995 rather than the principle of
applied in the EU Member States(cid:146)
(cid:145)international exhaustion(cid:146) previously applied in many Member States. There has been no room for parallel
imports of branded goods from outside the EU since that time. In its report of 1 December 1999 the
Commission does not commit itself on whether it is in favour of retaining or changing the current
exhaustion principle.

This being the case:

1. What is the Commission(cid:146)s position on the question of (cid:145)international exhaustion(cid:146) and an amendment to
Article 7 of the trade mark directive, and does it intend to propose a change in the law to the Council
and Parliament?

2. Does the Commission agree with the argument advanced by the advocates of a change in the law that
the reintroduction of parallel imports might lead to a significant reduction in the consumer prices of
certain branded products of between 30 and 50 %, thus making annual savings of up to EUR 35 to
40bn possible for consumers throughout the EU?

3.

In addition to the statements in its report of 1 December 1999, does the Commission have any
information to indicate that the occurrence of product piracy has declined appreciably throughout the
EU since parallel imports were prohibited in 1995, or does it have information to indicate that cases
of product piracy have in fact increased since that time?

4. How does the Commission view the claims by the branded goods industry that, if parallel imports

were permitted in the future, jobs would be relocated from the EU to third countries?

5. Does the Commission agree that growing demand from private customers through the internet will
give rise to major difficulties for the retail and mail order trade in branded products unless these
undertakings are themselves able to obtain supplies of cheap parallel imports and to offer goods at
correspondingly low prices?

6. Does the Commission intend to make (cid:145)international exhaustion rules(cid:146) in trade mark legislation the

subject of forthcoming rounds of negotiations at WTO level? If not, why not?

(1) OJ L 40, 11.2.1989, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(10 April 2000)

The discussion on exhaustion is based on a Commission staff working paper (1), which addresses certain
key issues. The working paper has been submitted to the Council and the Parliament. In the light of these
discussions and all the other relevant factors, the Commission will define its position on the question of
exhaustion of trade mark rights, as soon as appropriate and feasible.

The Commission would also refer to the answer given to other questions on the same issue (Mr Lehne,
Written Questions E-0362-3/00 (2)).

As indicated above the Commission will take a position on this issue once the discussions have been

1.
finalised. It is therefore premature at this stage to react to the question of the Honourable Member.

2.
Concerning the Honourable Member(cid:146)s reference to re-introduction of parallel imports the Commi-
ssion would underline that discussions have been focusing on the question of exhaustion of trade mark
rights. Many other factors apart from trade mark rights have an impact on parallel imports, such as import
duties, import quota and vertical relationships. The calculation on possible effects on consumer pricing

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/173

presented by the Honourable Member is not supported by the information provided in the study on
exhaustion carried out for the Commission by the NERA research institute in London.

3.
The Commission considers the phenomenon of counterfeiting and piracy to be a serious problem.
The possible impact of exhaustion regimes on this problem has to be analysed carefully. The Commission
has so far not received any information on the possible impact of a ban on parallel imports.

The question of the possible impact of a change in exhaustion regime on employment is still under

4.
discussion and it is too early to draw any conclusion from this discussion.

5.
The Honourable Member has raised an interesting and important question concerning the possible
impact of e-commerce on the exhaustion issue. The Commission is currently studying this question as a
priority issue.

6.
The Commission staff paper lists several different options to change the current exhaustion regime.
One of them is to raise this question at a bilateral or multilateral level with third countries. Whether or not
the issue of exhaustion should be raised in the forthcoming World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations
will be examined when the Commission defines its position on the exhaustion question.

(1) SEC(1999) 2033.
(2) See page 139.

(2000/C 330 E/197)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0489/00

by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 February 2000)

Subject: Implementation of the (cid:145)Leonardo da Vinci(cid:146) vocational training programme

It sometimes happens that the way in which the participation of young students in the (cid:145)Leonardo da Vinci(cid:146)
programme is organised gives cause for complaint. Specifically, an exchange of architecture students taking
their diploma examination (College of Higher Education) was set to begin on 1 January 2000 but was
postponed until July. This obviously disrupts the career plans of those young people and causes great
disappointment not only with the national partners, but also with the European Institutions.

Could the Commission therefore answer the following questions:

1. When will the programmes be cleared for publication by partners in the Member States?

2. How is it possible that candidates have already been recruited and nominated, even though the

programme is still at the approval stage?

3. Will the start of the various programmes or measures be set by the Commission or by the partners in

the Member States responsible for their publications?

4. Will there be compensation for the lost half-year?

5. The candidates were counting on participating in the programme. They now face a break in their
career. How does the Commission plan to support those disappointed candidates whose participation
is no longer possible because of the delay?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2000)

1.
Under the first phase of the Leonardo da Vinci programme (1995-1999), placement and exchange
programmes for students and young graduates were selected through an annual selection procedure
following a call for proposals. Programme promoters and partners can announce traineeships on receipt
of confirmation from the Commission that their programme has been approved.