Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) 2 May 2002 in Case C-292/99: Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Environment — Waste — Directives 75/442/EEC, 91/156/EEC, 91/689/EEC and 94/62/EC — Waste management plans)
Date: 2002-06-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, dangerous substance, packaging, waste management

15.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 144/3

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

2 May 2002

hazardous waste and under Article 14 of European Parliament
and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on
packaging and packaging waste;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

in Case C-292/99: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v French Republic (1)

(1) OJ C 281 of 2.10.1999.

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
Environment — Waste — Directives 75/442/EEC, 91/156/
EEC, 91/689/EEC and 94/62/EC — Waste management
plans)

(2002/C 144/03)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Language of the case: French)

23 April 2002

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

in Case C-443/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Oberlandesgericht Wien): Merck, Sharp & Dohme
GmbH v Paranova Pharmazeutika Handels GmbH (1)

In Case C-292/99, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: H. van Lier and L. Ström) v French Republic (Agents:
K. Rispal-Bellanger and D. Colas): Application for a declaration
that, by failing to draw up management plans either for the
whole of its territory or for all waste, and by failing to include
a chapter relating to packaging waste in all of the waste plans
which it has adopted, the French Republic has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Article 7(1) of Council Directive 75/442/
EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39), as
amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991
(OJ 1991 L 78, p. 32), under Article 6(1) of Council Directive
91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 on hazardous waste (OJ
1991 L 377, p. 20) and under Article 14 of European
Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December
1994 on packaging and packaging waste (OJ 1994 L 365,
p. 10), the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: F. Macken,
President of
J.-P. Puissochet,
V. Skouris (Rapporteur) and J. N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges;
A. Tizzano, Advocate General,: H. A. Rühl, Principal Adminis-
trator; Registrar, has given a judgment on 2 May 2002, in
which it:

the Chamber, C. Gulmann,

1. Declares that, by failing to draw up waste management plans
for the whole of its territory, by failing to draw up, for certain
regions or certain departments, such plans for waste containing
polychlorinated biphenyls, medical waste and special domestic
waste, and by failing to include a specific chapter relating to
packaging waste in all of the waste management plans which it
has adopted,
its
obligations under Article 7(1) of Council Directive 75/442/
EEC on 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Council
Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991, under Article 6(1)
of Council Directive 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 on

the French Republic has failed to fulfil

(Trade marks — Directive 89/104/EEC — Article 7(2) —
Exhaustion of the rights conferred by the trade mark
importation —
— Pharmaceutical products — Parallel

Repackaging of the trade-marked product)

(2002/C 144/04)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-443/99: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Oberlandesgericht Wien (Austria) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Merck, Sharp & Dohme GmbH and Paranova Pharmazeutika
Handels GmbH, on the interpretation of Article 7(2) of First
Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to
approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade
marks (OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1), as amended by the Agreement on
the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992 (OJ 1994 L 1,
the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodrı´guez Iglesias,
p. 3),
President, P. Jann (President of Chamber), C. Gulmann (Rappor-
teur), D. A. O. Edward, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen, V. Skouris,
J. N. Cunha Rodrigues and C. W. A. Timmermans, Judges;
F. G. Jacobs, Advocate General; D. Louterman-Hubeau, Head
of Division, for the Registrar, has given judgment on 23 April
2002, in which it has ruled: