Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 October 2001 in Case C-241/00 P: Kish Glass Co. Ltd v Commission of the European Communities and Pilkington United Kingdom Ltd (Appeal — Competition — Dominant position — Market in float glass — Rights of the complainant — Appeal manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2002-01-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: General Court (EU), application of EU law, competition law, infringement of EU law, interpretation of the law

C 3/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

5.1.2002

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Unabhängiger
Verwaltungssenat of the Land Vorarlberg by orders of
4 September 2001, 10 September 2001 and 11 September
2001 in the appeals brought by Kurt Beck, Christian Kröll
and Manfred Laaber

of 18 October 2001

(Cases C-339/01, C-343/01 and C-357/01)

in Case C-241/00 P: Kish Glass Co. Ltd v Commission
of the European Communities and Pilkington United
Kingdom Ltd (1)

(2002/C 3/17)

(Appeal — Competition — Dominant position — Market in
float glass — Rights of the complainant — Appeal mani-
festly unfounded)

(2002/C 3/16)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-241/00 P: Kish Glass Co. Ltd, established in Dublin
(Ireland), represented by P. Watson BL and M. Byrne, Solicitor,
appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
the European Communities (Fourth Chamber) in Case T-65/96
Kish Glass v Commission [2000] ECR II-1885 seeking to have
that judgment set aside and the forms of order sought by the
applicant at first instance granted, the other parties to the
proceedings being: Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: R. Lyal, assisted and by N. Khan) and Pilkington United
Kingdom Ltd, established in Saint Helens, Merseyside (United
Kingdom), represented by J. Kallaugher — the Court (Fourth
Chamber), composed of: S. von Bahr, President of the Chamb-
er, A. La Pergola and C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur),
Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has
given an order on 18 October 2001, in which it:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Kish Glass Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247 of 26.8.2000.

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by orders of 4 September 2001,
10 September 2001 and 11 September 2001 by the Unabhän-
giger Verwaltungssenat of the Land Vorarlberg (Independent
Administrative Chamber of the Land Vorarlberg), which were
received at
the Court Registry on 10 September 2001
(C-339/01), 12 September 2001 (C-343/01) and on 20 Sep-
tember 2001 (C-357/01), for a preliminary ruling in the
appeals brought by Kurt Beck, Christian Kröll and Manfred
Laaber on the following questions:

1. Does Article 2(1)(b) of Council Directive 79/112/EEC (1)
of 18 December 1978 on the approximation of the
laws of the Member States relating to the labelling,
presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to
the ultimate consumer (now consolidated in European
Parliament
and Council Directive 2000/13/EC of
20 March 2000, OJ 2000 L 109, p. 29; hereinafter
‘the labelling Directive’), under which — subject
to
Community provisions applicable to natural mineral
waters and to foodstuffs for particular nutritional uses,
the labelling and methods used may not attribute to any
foodstuff the property of preventing, treating or curing a
human disease, or suggest that it possesses such proper-
legislation which makes it an
ties, preclude national
offence when marketing foodstuffs:

(a)

to refer to physiological or pharmacological effects,
in particular those which preserve youthfulness,
inhibit signs of ageing, promote slimming or main-
tain health, or to create the impression of any such
effect;

(b)

to refer to case histories, recommendations made by
doctors or medical experts’ reports;

(c)

to use health-related, pictorial or stylised represen-
tations of organs of the human body, pictures
of members of the health-care professions or of
sanatoria or other pictures or illustrations referring
to health-care activities?