Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 7 November 2002 In Joined Cases C-228/01 and C-289/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the tribunal de grande instance de Dax): Jacques Bourrasse and Jean-Marie Perchicot (Transport— Directive 84/647/EEC — Use of vehicles hired without drivers for the carriage of goods by road — Registration of hired vehicles — Hired vehicles operating under Community authorisation — Regulation (EEC) No 881/92 — Management of tachograph discs of hired vehicles — Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85)
Date: 2002-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, Portugal, carriage for hire or reward, carriage of goods, interpretation of the law, recording equipment, road transport, transport authorisation, transport staff, vehicle rental

C 323/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.12.2002

C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber,
D.A.O. Edward and S. von Bahr, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate
General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 Novem-
ber 2002, in which it:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Mr Hirschfeldt to pay the costs.

( 1) OJ C 200 of 14.7.2001.

party uses in the course of trade a sign which is identical to a validly
registered trade mark on goods which are identical to those for which
it is registered, the trade mark proprietor of the mark is entitled, in
circumstances such as those in the present case, to rely on Article
5(1)(a) of that directive to prevent that use. It is immaterial that, in
the context of that use, the sign is perceived as a badge of support for
or loyalty or affiliation to the trade mark proprietor.

(1) OJ C 212 of 28.7.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 12 November 2002

in Case C-206/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Chancery
Division): Arsenal Football Club plc v Matthew Reed (1)

(Approximation of laws — Trade marks — Directive 89/
104/EEC — Article 5(1)(a) — Scope of the proprietor’s
exclusive right to the trade mark)

(2002/C 323/29)

(Language of the case: English)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 7 November 2002

In Joined Cases C-228/01 and C-289/01 (Reference for a
preliminary ruling from the tribunal de grande instance
de Dax): Jacques Bourrasse and Jean-Marie Perchicot (1)

(Transport— Directive 84/647/EEC — Use of vehicles hired
without drivers for the carriage of goods by road —
Registration of hired vehicles — Hired vehicles operating
under Community authorisation — Regulation (EEC)
No 881/92 — Management of tachograph discs of hired
vehicles — Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85)

(2002/C 323/30)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case C-206/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales,
Chancery Division, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
pending before that court between Arsenal Football Club plc
and Matthew Reed, on the interpretation of Article 5(1)(a) of
the 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),
the Court, composed of:
G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet,
C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur) (Presidents of Chambers),
C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann, V. Skouris, F. Macken,
N. Colneric and S. von Bahr, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,
Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 12 November 2002, in
which it has ruled:

In a situation which is not covered by Article 6(1) of the First Council
Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the
laws of the Member States relating to trade marks, where a third

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

In Joined Cases C-228/01 and C-289/01: Reference to the
Court under Article 234 EC by the Cour d’appel de Pau (C-228/
01) and the Tribunal de grande instance de Dax (C-289/01)
(France) for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings
pending before those courts against Jacques Bourrasse (C-228/
01) and Jean-Marie Perchicot (C-289/01) Third parties: Union
régionale syndicale des petits et moyens transporteurs du Sud-
Ouest (Unostra Aquitaine) (C-228/01), Fédération générale des
transports et de l’équipement CFDT (FGTE-CFDT) (C-289/01)
and Inspection du travail des transports (C-228/01 and C-289/
01), and on the interpretation of Article 2 of Council Directive
84/647/EEC of 19 December 1984 on the use of vehicles
hired without drivers for the carriage of goods by road (OJ
1984 L 335, p. 72), as amended by Council Directive 90/398/
EEC of 24 July 1990 (OJ 1990 L 202, p. 46), the Court (Second

21.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 323/23

Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, acting for the President
of the Second Chamber, V. Skouris and N. Colneric (Rappor-
teur), Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; H. von Holstein,
Deputy Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 November 2002,
in which it has ruled:

1. Articles 3 and 5 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 881/92 of
26 March 1992 on access to the market in the carriage of
goods by road within the Community to or from the territory of
a Member State or passing across the territory of one or more
Member States, and Article 14 of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 3821/85 of 20 December 1985 on recording equipment
in road transport, both in its original version and in that
resulting from Council Regulation (EC) No 2135/98 of
24 September 1998, do not permit a road haulage company
established in one Member State, which hires out vehicles
without drivers to a road haulage company established in
another Member State,
its own
Community authorisation to the lessee or
to retain the
management of the tachograph discs of the hired vehicles.

to transfer the benefit of

2. Article 2(1) of Council Directive 84/647/EEC of 19 December
1984 on the use of vehicles hired without drivers for the
carriage of goods by road, as amended by Council Directive 90/
398/EEC of 24 July 1990, should be interpreted as meaning
that, subject to the possible application of Article 4 of that
directive, vehicles hired without drivers must be registered in the
Member State in which the lessee road haulage company is
established.

( 1) OJ C 227 of 11.8.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 7 November 2002

in Case C-348/01: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v French Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
Directive 97/11/EC — Environmental impact assessment of
certain public and private projects — Incomplete transpo-
sition)

(2002/C 323/31)

(Language of the case: French)

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

In Case C-348/01, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: G. zur Hausen and J. Adda) v French Republic

(Agents: G. de Bergues and D. Colas also by C.
Isidoro):
Application for a declaration that, by failing to adopt all the
laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply with Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997
amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the
effects of certain public and private projects on the environ-
ment (OJ 1997 L 73, p. 5), alternatively by failing to inform
the Commission of those provisions, the French Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive, the Court
(Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President of
the Chamber, R. Schintgen, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur),
V. Skouris and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; A. Tizzano,
Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Administrator, for the Regis-
trar, has given a judgment on 7 November 2002, in which it:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed time-
limit all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
necessary to comply with Article 1(7) and (11) of Council
Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive
85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public
and private projects on the environment, the French Republic
has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 331 of 24.11.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 7 November 2002

in Case C-352/01: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Kingdom of Spain (1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure
to transpose Directive 98/8/EC)

(2002/C 323/32)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

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

In Case C-352/01, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: G. Valero Jordana) v Kingdom of Spain (Agent:
L. Fraguas Gadea): Application for a declaration that, by failing
to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
necessary to comply with Directive 98/8/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 concerning
the placing of biocidal products on the market (OJ 1998
L 123, p. 1) or, in any event, by failing to communicate them
to the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil
its obligations under that directive, the Court, composed of: