Case C-54/01: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice) — by order of that court of 23 November 2000 in the case of Winward Industries Inc.
Date: 2001-05-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: approximation of laws, brand name, interpretation of the law, patents licence, trade mark, trade-mark law

C 150/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

19.5.2001

1. Declares

that, by refusing to refund to taxable persons
established in a Member State other than the French Republic,
who are holders of a main contract for a composite supply of
services relating to waste disposal, the value added tax which
they have been required to pay to the French State in cases
where they have subcontracted part of the work covered by such
a contract to a taxable person established in France, the French
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Eighth
Council Directive 79/1072/EEC of 6 December 1979 on the
harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to
turnover taxes — Arrangements for the refund of value added
tax to taxable persons not established in the territory of the
country, in particular Article 2 thereof;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the application;

3. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 55 of 20.02.1998.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesge-
richtshof (Federal Court of Justice) — by order of that
court of 23 November 2000 in the case of Winward
Industries Inc.

(Case C-54/01)

(2001/C 150/15)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Bundesgerichtshof
of 23 November 2000, which was received at the Court
Registry on 8 February 2001, for a preliminary ruling in the
case of Winward Industries Inc. on the following questions on
the interpretation of Article 3(1)(b), (c) and (e) of the First
Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 (1) to
approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade
marks:

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesge-
richtshof (Federal Court of Justice) — by order of that
court of 23 November 2000 in the case of Linde AG

(Case C-53/01)

(2001/C 150/14)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Bundesgerichtshof
of 23 November 2000, which was received at the Court
Registry on 8 February 2001, for a preliminary ruling in
the case of Linde AG on the following questions on the
interpretation of Article 3(1)(b), (c) and (e) of the First Council
Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 (1) to approximate
the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks:

1.

2.

In determining whether a three-dimensional trade mark
which depicts the shape of a product has distinctive
character within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the
above directive is there a stricter test for distinctive
character than in the case of other forms of trade marks?

any

significance

In the case of three-dimensional trade marks which depict
the shape of the product, does Article 3(1)(c) of the
Directive have
independently of
Article 3(1)(e)? If so, when considering Article 3(1)(c) —
or alternatively Article 3(1)(e) — must regard be had to
the interest of the trade in having the shape of the product
available for use, so that registration is, at
in
principle, ruled out and is possible as a rule only in the
case of trade marks which meet the requirements of
Article 3(3), first sentence, of the directive?

least

(1) OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1.

1.

2.

In determining whether a three-dimensional trade mark
which depicts the shape of a product has distinctive
character within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the
above directive is there a stricter test for distinctive
character than in the case of other forms of trade marks?

any

significance

In the case of three-dimensional trade marks which depict
the shape of the product, does Article 3(1)(c) of the
Directive have
independently of
Article 3(1)(e)? If so, when considering Article 3(1)(c) —
or alternatively Article 3(1)(e) — must regard be had to
the interest of the trade in having the shape of the product
available for use, so that registration is, at
in
principle, ruled out and is possible as a rule only in the
case of trade marks which meet the requirements of
Article 3(3), first sentence, of the directive?

least

(1) OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesge-
richtshof (Federal Court of Justice) — by order of that
court of 23 November 2000 in the case of Rado Uhren
AG

(Case C-55/01)

(2001/C 150/16)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Bundesgerichtshof
of 23 November 2000, which was received at the Court
Registry on 8 February 2001, for a preliminary ruling in the
case of Rado Uhren AG on the following questions on the
interpretation of Article 3(1)(b), (c) and (e) of the First Council
Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 (1) to approximate
the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks: