Judgment of the Court of 13 January 2004 in Case C-440/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht ): Gesamtbetriebsrat der Kühne & Nagel AG & Co. KG v Kühne & Nagel AG & Co. KG (Social policy — Articles 4 and 11 of Directive 94/45/EC — European Works Councils — Informing and consulting employees in Community-scale undertakings — Group of undertakings whose central management is not located in a Member State)
Date: 2004-02-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European undertaking, group of companies, interpretation of the law, worker consultation, worker information, works council

21.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 47/1

I

(Information)

COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT OF JUSTICE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 11 December 2003

in Case C-127/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling
from the Bundesgerichtshof): Hässle AB v Ratiopharm
GmbH (1)

(Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 — Medicinal prod-
ucts — Supplementary protection certificate — Articles 15
and 19 — Validity of Article 19 — Concept of ‘first
authorisation to place ... on the market in the Community’
— Legal effects of non-compliance with the relevant date
referred to in Article 19)

(2004/C 47/01)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-127/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Hässle AB and Ratiopharm GmbH, on the interpretation of
Articles 15 and 19 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92
of 18 June 1992 concerning the creation of a supplementary
protection certificate for medicinal products (OJ 1992 L 182,
p. 1), the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: V. Skouris,
acting for the President of
the Chamber, C. Gulmann,
J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, R. Schintgen and F. Macken (Rappor-
teur), Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; D. Louterman-
Hubeau, Head of Division, for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 11 December 2003, in which it has ruled:

Consideration of the second question referred has disclosed no
factor capable of affecting the validity of Article 19 of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 of 18 June 1992 concerning
the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for
medicinal products.

1.

2.

the Community’ in Article 19(1) of Regulation No 1768/92
refers solely to the first authorisation required under provisions
on medicinal products, within the meaning of Council Directive
65/65/EEC of 26 January 1965 on the approximation of
provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action
relating to proprietary medicinal products, granted in any of the
Member States, and does not therefore refer to authorisations
required under legislation on pricing of or reimbursement for
medicinal products.

3. A supplementary protection certificate which, contrary to the
requirements of Article 19 of Regulation No 1768/92, has
been delivered where the first marketing authorisation in the
Community was obtained prior to the relevant date fixed by
that provision is invalid pursuant to Article 15 thereof.

(1) OJ C 163 of 10.6.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 13 January 2004

in Case C-440/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Bundesarbeitsgericht ): Gesamtbetriebsrat der Kühne
& Nagel AG & Co. KG v Kühne & Nagel AG & Co. KG (1)

(Social policy — Articles 4 and 11 of Directive 94/45/EC —
European Works Councils — Informing and consulting
employees in Community-scale undertakings — Group of
undertakings whose central management is not located in a
Member State)

(2004/C 47/02)

(Language of the case: German)

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

So far as concerns medicinal products for human use, the
concept of ‘first authorisation to place ... on the market ... in

In Case C-440/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) for a preliminary

C 47/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.2.2004

2.

ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Gesamtbetriebsrat der Kühne & Nagel AG & Co. KG and
Kühne & Nagel AG & Co. KG, on the interpretation of Articles 4
and 11 of Council Directive 94/45/EC of 22 September 1994
on the establishment of a European Works Council or a
procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-
scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing
and consulting employees (OJ 1994 L 254, p. 64), the Court,
composed of: V. Skouris, President, P. Jann and J.N. Cunha
Rodrigues (Presidents of Chambers), A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puisso-
chet, R. Schintgen, F. Macken (Rapporteur), N. Colneric and
S. von Bahr,
Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; M.-
F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given
a judgment on 13 January 2004, in which it has ruled:

provide

obligation to

information deriving

from
The
Articles 4(1) and 11(1) of the Directive encompasses infor-
mation on the average total number of employees and their
distribution across the Member States, the establishments of
the undertaking and the group undertakings, and on the
structure of the undertaking and of the undertakings in the
group, as well as the names and addresses of the employee
representation which might participate in the setting up of a
special negotiating body in accordance with Article 5 of the
in the establishment of a European Works
Directive or
Council, where that information is essential to the opening of
negotiations for the establishment of such a council.

1. Articles 4(1) and 11(1) of Council Directive 94/45/EC of
22 September 1994 on the establishment of a European Works
Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and
Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of
informing and consulting employees must be interpreted as
meaning that:

— where, in a situation such as that at issue before the
national court, the central management of a Community-
scale group of undertakings is not located in a Member
State, central management’s responsibility for providing
the employees’ representatives with the information essen-
tial to the opening of negotiations for the establishment
lies with the deemed
of a European Works Council
central management under the second subparagraph of
Article 4(2) of the Directive;

— where central management does not, for the purpose of
establishing a European Works Council, make certain
information available to the deemed central management
under the second subparagraph of Article 4(2) of the
Directive, the latter,
its
obligation to provide information to the employees’
representatives, must request the information essential to
the opening of negotiations for the establishment of such
a council from the other undertakings belonging to the
group which are located in the Member States, and has a
right to receive that information from them;

in order to be able to fulfil

— the management of each of

the other undertakings
belonging to the group which are located in the Member
States is under an obligation to supply the deemed
central management under the second subparagraph of
Article 4(2) of
the Directive with the information
concerned where it is in possession of the information or
is in a position to obtain it;

— the Member States concerned are to ensure that the
management of those other undertakings supplies the
information to the deemed central management under the
second subparagraph of Article 4(2) of the Directive.

(1) OJ C 45 of 10.2.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 13 January 2004

in Case C-453/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven): Kühne &
Heitz NV v Productschap voor Pluimvee en Eieren (1)

(Poultrymeat — Export refunds — Failure to refer a question
for a preliminary ruling — Final administrative decision —
Effect of a preliminary ruling given by the Court after that
decision — Legal certainty — Primacy of Community law
— Principle of cooperation — Article 10 EC)

(2004/C 47/03)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

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

In Case C-453/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Nether-
lands) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between Kühne & Heitz NV and Productschap
voor Pluimvee en Eieren, on the interpretation of Community
law and, in particular, the principle of cooperation arising
from Article 10 EC, the Court, composed of: V. Skouris,
President, P.
Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, C. Gulmann,
J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas, Presidents of Chambers,
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen,
F. Macken, N. Colneric (Rapporteur) and S. von Bahr, Judges;
P. Léger, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 13 January 2004,
in which it has ruled: