Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 7 November 2002 In Joined Cases C-24/01 P and C-25/01 P: Glencore Grain Ltd and Compagnie Continentale (France) SA (Appeal — Emergency aid provided by the Community to the States of the former Soviet Union — Invitation to tender — Free competition — Hearing of witnesses)
Date: 2002-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Community loan, General Court (EU), appeal to the Court (EU), competition law, distribution business, infringement of EU law

21.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 323/19

and J.N. Cuhna Rodrigues, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 24 October 2002, in which it:

1. Declares that, by failing to specify the circumstances in which
the workers concerned are to be provided with special corrective
the work concerned, the Italian
appliances appropriate for
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 9(3)
of Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the
minimum safety and health requirements for work with display
screen equipment (fifth individual Directive within the meaning
of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC);

Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), President
of the Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. La Pergola, P. Jann
and S. von Bahr, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass,
Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 November 2002, in
which it:

1. Dismisses the appeals;

2. Orders Glencore Grain Ltd to pay the costs in Case C-24/01 P
and Compagnie Continentale (France) SA to pay the costs in
Case C-25/01 P.

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 108 of 7.4.2001.

( 1) OJ C 79 of 10.3.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 7 November 2002

In Joined Cases C-24/01 P and C-25/01 P: Glencore Grain
Ltd and Compagnie Continentale (France) SA (1)

(Appeal — Emergency aid provided by the Community to
the States of the former Soviet Union — Invitation to tender
— Free competition — Hearing of witnesses)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 24 October 2002

in Case C-81/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Cour de cassation): Borie Manoux SARL v Directeur
de l’Institut national de la propriété industrielle (INPI) (1)

(Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets —
Wine — Description and presentation of wines — Quality
wines produced in specific regions — Brand name printed on
label — Restrictions — Articles 11 and 40 of Regulation
No 2392/89)

(2002/C 323/23)

(Language of the case: French)

(2002/C 323/24)

(Language of the case: French)

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

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

In Joined Cases C-24/01 P and C-25/01 P, Glencore Grain Ltd,
formerly Richco Commodities Ltd, established in Hamilton
(Bermudes) (Agents: P. Bos and J. van Zuuren), Compagnie
Continentale (France) SA, established in Labège (France)
(Agents: P. Bos and P. Chabrier): Two Appeals against the
judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities (Second Chamber) of 8 November 2000 in
Joined Cases T-485/93, T-491/93, T-494/93 and T-61/98
Dreyfus and Others v Commission [2000] ECR II-3659,
seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other parties
the European
to the proceedings being: Commission of
Communities (Agents: M.-J. Jonczy and T. van Rijn), Louis
Dreyfus & Cie SA, established in Paris (France), the Court (Fifth

In Case C-81/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Cour de cassation (France) for a preliminary ruling in
the proceedings pending before that court between Borie
Manoux SARL and Directeur de l’Institut national de la
propriété industrielle (INPI), on the interpretation of Article 40
of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2392/89 of 24 July 1989
laying down general rules for the description and presentation
of wines and grape musts (OJ 1989 L 232, p. 13), as amended
by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3897/91 of 16 December
1991 (OJ 1991 L 368, p. 5), the Court (Second Chamber),
composed of: R. Schintgen, President of the Chamber, V. Skou-
Judges; L.A. Geelhoed,
ris and N. Colneric (Rapporteur),
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 24 October 2002, in which it has ruled: