Judgment of the Court of 9 October 2001 in Case C-377/98: Kingdom of the Netherlands v European Parliament and Council of the European Union (Annulment — Directive 98/44/EC — Legal protection of biotechnological inventions — Legal basis — Article 100a of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 95 EC), Article 235 of the EC Treaty (now Article 308 EC) or Articles 130 and 130f of the EC Treaty (now Articles 157 EC and 163 EC) — Subsidiarity — Legal certainty — Obligations of Member States under international law — Fundamental rights — Human dignity — Principle of collegiality for draft legislation of the Commission)
Date: 2001-11-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Netherlands, action for failure to act, biotechnology, infringement of EU law, invention, patent law

24.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 331/1

I

(Information)

COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT OF JUSTICE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 9 October 2001

in Case C-377/98: Kingdom of the Netherlands v European
Parliament and Council of the European Union (1)

(Annulment — Directive 98/44/EC — Legal protection of
biotechnological inventions — Legal basis — Article 100a
of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 95 EC),
Article 235 of the EC Treaty (now Article 308 EC) or
Articles 130 and 130f of the EC Treaty (now Articles 157
EC and 163 EC) — Subsidiarity — Legal certainty —
Obligations of Member States under international law —
Fundamental rights — Human dignity — Principle of
collegiality for draft legislation of the Commission)

(2001/C 331/01)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

Registrar, has given a judgment on 9 October 2001, in which
it:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear the costs;

3. Orders the Italian Republic, the Kingdom of Norway and the

Commission each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 378 of 5.12.1998.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 9 October 2001

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-377/98: Kingdom of the Netherlands (Agents:
M.A. Fierstra and I. van der Steen) supported by Italian
Republic (Agent: U. Leanza, assisted by P.G. Ferri), and by
Kingdom of Norway (Agent: H.W. Longva) v European
Parliament (Agents: J. Schoo and E. Vandenbosch) and Council
of the European Union (Agents: R. Gosalbo Bono, G. Houttuin
and A. Lo Monaco) supported by Commission of the European
Communities (Agents: K. Banks and P. van Nuffel) — appli-
cation for annulment of Directive 98/44/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal
protection of biotechnological inventions (OJ 1998 L 213,
p. 13) — the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodrı´guez Iglesias,
President, P. Jann, F. Macken, N. Colneric and S. von Bahr
(Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward, A. La
Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), L. Sevo´ n, M. Wathelet,
V. Skouris and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; F.G. Jacobs,
Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the

in Case C-409/98 [reference for a preliminary ruling from
the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s
Bench Division (Divisional Court)]: Commissioners of
Customs & Excise v Mirror Group plc (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Exemption for the leasing or letting
of immovable property — Meaning — Undertaking to
become a tenant)

(2001/C 331/02)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-409/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the High Court of
Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Div-
isional Court) (United Kingdom) for a preliminary ruling in the
proceedings pending before that court between Com-
missioners of Customs & Excise and Mirror Group plc — on
the interpretation of Article 13B(b) of the Sixth Council
Directive of 17 May 1977 (77/388/EEC) on the harmonisation