Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 February 2003 in Case C-245/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): Stichting ter Exploitatie van Naburige Rechten (SENA) v Nederlandse Omroep Stichting (NOS) (Directive 92/100/EEC — Rental right and lending right and certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property — Article 8(2) — Broadcasting and communication to the public — Equitable remuneration)
Date: 2003-04-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: copyright, equal pay, intellectual property, interpretation of the law, remuneration of work

5.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 83/1

I

(Information)

COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT OF JUSTICE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 13 February 2003

in Case C-228/00: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Federal Republic of Germany (1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil
its obligations —
Article 7(2) and (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 —
Classification of the purpose of a shipment of waste (recovery
or disposal) — Incinerated waste — Point R1 of Annex II B
to Directive 75/442/EEC — Concept of use principally as a
fuel or other means to generate energy)

(2003/C 83/01)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-228/00, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: G. zur Hausen) v Federal Republic of Germany
(Agent: T. Jürgensen, assisted by D. Sellner): Application for a
declaration that by raising unjustified objections against certain
shipments of waste to other Member States to be used
principally as a fuel the Federal Republic of Germany has failed
to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(2) and (4) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the
supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into
and out of the European Community (OJ 1993 L 30, p. 1), the
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet, President of
(Rapporteur),
the
D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann and S. von Bahr, Judges; F.G. Jacobs,
Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 13 February 2003, in
which it:

Timmermans

Chamber,

C.W.A.

principally as a fuel, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed
to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(2) and (4) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the
supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and
out of the European Community;

2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 259 of 9.9.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 6 February 2003

in Case C-245/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): Stichting ter Exploitatie
van Naburige Rechten (SENA) v Nederlandse Omroep
Stichting (NOS) (1)

(Directive 92/100/EEC — Rental right and lending right
and certain rights related to copyright in the field of
intellectual property — Article 8(2) — Broadcasting and
communication to the public — Equitable remuneration)

(2003/C 83/02)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

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

1. Declares that by raising unjustified objections

to certain
shipments of waste to other Member States to be used

In Case C-245/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) for a

C 83/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.4.2003

preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Stichting ter Exploitatie van Naburige Rechten
(SENA) and Nederlandse Omroep Stichting (NOS), on the
interpretation of Article 8(2) of Council Directive 92/100/
EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right
and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of
intellectual property (OJ 1992 L 346, p. 61), the Court
(Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur),
President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, V. Skouris, F. Macken
and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues,
Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate
General; M.-F. Contet, Administrator, for the Registrar, has
given a judgment on 6 February 2003, in which it has ruled:

1.

in the field of

The concept of equitable remuneration in Article 8(2) of
Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on
rental right and lending right and on certain rights related
intellectual property must be
to copyright
interpreted uniformly in all the Member States and applied
by each Member State;
for each Member State to
is
determine, in its own territory, the most appropriate criteria
for assuring, within the limits imposed by Community law
to that
and Directive 92/100 in particular, adherence
Community concept.

it

2. Article 8(2) of Directive 92/100 does not preclude a model
for calculating what constitutes equitable remuneration for
performing artists and phonogram producers that operates by
reference to variable and fixed factors, such as the number of
hours of phonograms broadcast, the viewing and listening
densities achieved by the radio and television broadcasters
represented by the broadcast organisation, the tariffs fixed by
agreement in the field of performance rights and broadcast
rights in respect of musical works protected by copyright, the
tariffs
in the
set by the public broadcast organisations
Member States bordering on the Member State concerned,
and the amounts paid by commercial stations, provided that
is such as to enable a proper balance to be
that model
achieved between the interests of performing artists and
producers in obtaining remuneration for the broadcast of a
particular phonogram, and the interests of third parties in
being able to broadcast the phonogram on terms that are
reasonable, and that it does not contravene any principle of
Community law.

( 1) OJ C 247 of 26.8.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 13 February 2003

in Case C-458/00: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (1)

its obligations —
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil
Article 7(2) and (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 —
Classification of the purpose of a shipment of waste (recovery
or disposal) — Incinerated waste — Point R1 of Annex II B
to Directive 75/442/EEC — Concept of use principally as a
fuel or other means to generate energy)

(2003/C 83/03)

(Language of the case: French)

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

In Case C-458/00, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: H. Støvlbaek and J. Adda) v Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg (Agent: J. Faltz), supported by Republic of Austria
(Agent: C. Pesendorfer): Application for a declaration that by
raising unjustified objections to certain shipments of waste to
another Member State to be used principally as a fuel, in
breach of Article 7(2) and (4) of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control
of shipments of waste within, into and out of the European
Community (OJ 1993 L 30, p. 1), and of Article 1(f) in
conjunction with point R1 of Annex II B to Council Directive
75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39),
as amended by Commission Decision 96/350/EC of 24 May
1996 (OJ 1996 L 135, p. 32), the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2, 6 and 7 of
that Regulation and under Article 1(f) in conjunction with
point R1 of Annex II B to that Directive, the Court (Fifth
Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet, President of the Chamb-
er, C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann
and S. von Bahr,
Jacobs, Advocate General;
H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given
a judgment on 13 February 2003, in which it:

Judges; F.G.

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay

the costs;

3. Orders the Republic of Austria to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 45 of 10.2.2001.