Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) 16 March 2004 In Joined Cases C-264/01, C-306/01, C-354/01 and C-355/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf and from the Bundesgerichtshof): AOK Bundesverband and Others v Ichthyol-Gesellschaft Cordes, Hermani & Co., Mundipharma GmbH, Gödecke GmbH, Intersan, Institut für pharmazeutische und klinische Forschung GmbH
Date: 2004-04-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: competition, health insurance, interpretation of the law, restrictive trade practice

C 94/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.4.2004

(EC) No 1768/95 of 24 July 1995 implementing rules on the
agricultural exemption provided for in Article 14(3) of Regu-
lation No 2100/94 (OJ 1995 L 173, p. 14), the Court (Fifth
Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, acting for the President of the
Fifth Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans and S. von Bahr (Rappor-
Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General; L.
teur),
Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 11 March 2004, in which it has ruled:

1. Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1768/95 of
24 July 1995 implementing rules on the agricultural exemp-
tion provided for in Article 14(3) of Council Regulation (EC)
No 2100/94 on Community plant variety rights must be
interpreted as meaning that a limited company is capable of
constituting an ‘organisation of holders’ of plant variety
rights for the purposes of that provision. Such an organisa-
tion may invoke the rights of holders who are members of
another organisation where the other organisation is itself a
it may not
the first organisation. However,
member of
invoke the rights of holders who, although not members of
the first organisation or of another organisation which is,
have appointed it to safeguard their interests in return for a
consideration;

2. The provisions of

the sixth indent of Article 14(3) of
Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 of 27 July 1994 on
Community plant variety rights in conjunction with Article
8(2) of Regulation No 1768/95 cannot be construed as
meaning that the holder of a Community plant variety right
can require a farmer to provide the information specified in
those provisions where there is no indication that
the
farmer has used or will use, for propagating purposes in the
field, on his own holding,
the harvest
obtained by planting, on his own holding, propagating
material of a variety other than a hybrid or synthetic variety
which is covered by that right and belongs to one of the
agricultural plant species listed in Article 14(2) of Regu-
lation No 2100/94.

the product of

(1) OJ C 200 of 14.07.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

16 March 2004

In Joined Cases C-264/01, C-306/01, C-354/01 and C-355/
01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlan-
desgericht Düsseldorf and from the Bundesgerichtshof):
AOK Bundesverband and Others v Ichthyol-Gesellschaft

Cordes, Hermani & Co., Mundipharma GmbH, Gödecke
für pharmazeutische und
GmbH,

Intersan,

Institut

klinische Forschung GmbH (1)

(Competition — Undertakings — Sickness funds — Agree-
ments, decisions and concerted practices — Interpretation
of Articles 81 EC, 82 EC and 86 EC — Decisions of groups
of sickness funds determining maximum amounts paid in
respect of medicinal products)

(2004/C 94/03)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Joined Cases C-264/01, C-306/01, C-354/01 and C-355/01:
References to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Oberlan-
desgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) and by the Bundesgerichtshof
(Germany) for preliminary rulings in the proceedings pending
before those courts between AOK Bundesverband, Bundesver-
band der Betriebskrankenkassen (BKK), Bundesverband der
Innungskrankenkassen, Bundesverband der landwirtschaftlichen
Krankenkassen, Verband der Angestelltenkrankenkassen eV,
Verband der Arbeiter-Ersatzkassen, Bundesknappschaft, See-
Krankenkasse and Ichthyol-Gesellschaft Cordes, Hermani & Co.
(C-264/01), Mundipharma GmbH (C-306/01), Gödecke GmbH
(C-354/01), Intersan, Institut für pharmazeutische und klinische
Forschung GmbH (C-355/01), on the interpretation of Articles
81 EC, 82 EC and 86 EC, the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed
Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, C.
of: V. Skouris, President, P.
Gulmann, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas (Presidents of
J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen, F. Macken, N.
Chambers),
Colneric and S. von Bahr (Rapporteur),
Jacobs,
Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 16 March 2004, in which it
has ruled:

Judges; F.G.

Groups of sickness funds, such as the AOK Bundesverband, the
Bundesverband der Betriebskrankenkassen (BKK), the Bundes-
verband der Innungskrankenkassen,
the Bundesverband der
landwirtschaftlichen Krankenkassen, the Verband der Angestell-
tenkrankenkassen eV, the Verband der Arbeiter-Ersatzkassen,
the Bundesknappschaft and the See-Krankenkasse, do not
constitute undertakings or associations of undertakings within
the meaning of Article 81 EC when they determine fixed
maximum amounts corresponding to the upper limit of the
price of medicinal products whose cost is borne by sickness
funds.

(1) OJ C 303 of 27.10.2001, and OJ L 348 of 08.12.2001.