Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) 11 March 2004 In Case C-182/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf): Saatgut-Treuhandverwaltungsgesellschaft mbH v Werner Jäger
Date: 2004-04-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, industrial property, interpretation of the law, patent law, plant variety right, private limited company

17.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/1

I

(Information)

COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT OF JUSTICE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

4 March 2004

In Joined Cases C-19/01, C-50/01 and C-84/01 (Reference
for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Pisa, the
Tribunale di Siena and the Corte Suprema di Cassazione):
Istituto nazionale della previdenza
sociale (INPS) v
Alberto Barsotti and Others, Milena Castellani v Istituto
nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS), Istituto nazio-
nale della previdenza sociale (INPS) v Anna Maria
Venturi (1)

(Social policy — Protection of employees in the event of
their employer's insolvency — Directive 80/987/EEC —
liability of the guarantee institutions —
Limitation of
Ceiling to the liability — Part payments by the employer
— Social objective of the directive)

(2004/C 94/01)

(Language of the case: Italian)

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

In Joined Cases C-19/01, C-50/01 and C-84/01: References to
the Court under Article 234 EC by, respectively, the Tribunale
di Pisa (Italy), the Tribunale di Siena (Italy) and the Corte
Suprema di Cassazione (Italy) for preliminary rulings in the
proceedings pending before those courts between Istituto
nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) and Alberto Barsotti
and Others (C-19/01), and between Milena Castellani and Isti-
tuto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) (C-50/01), and
between Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) and
Anna Maria Venturi (C-84/01), on the interpretation of Council
Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the approxima-
tion of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection
of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer
(OJ 1980 L 283, p. 23),
(Second Chamber),
composed of: V. Skouris, acting for the President of the Second
Chamber, R. Schintgen and N. Colneric (Rapporteur), Judges; C.
Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Adminis-
trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 October
2003, in which it has ruled:

the Court

Article 3(1) and the first subparagraph of Article 4(3) of
Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the

protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their
employer are to be interpreted as meaning that they do not
allow a Member State to limit the liability of the guarantee
institutions to a sum which covers the basic needs of the
employees concerned and from which are to be deducted
payments made by the employer during the period covered by
the guarantee.

(1) OJ C 79 of 10.03.2001,

OJ C 95 of 24.03.2001 and
OJ C 118 of 21.04.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

11 March 2004

In Case C-182/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf): Saatgut-Treuhandver-
waltungsgesellschaft mbH v Werner Jäger (1)

(Plant varieties — System of protection — Article 14(3) of
Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 and Articles 3(2) and 8 of
Regulation (EC) No 1768/95 — Organisation of holders —
Meaning — Organisation's obligation to act only for its
members — Use by farmers of the product of the harvest
— Obligation to provide information to the holder of the
Community right)

(2004/C 94/02)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-182/01: References to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) for a preli-
minary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court
between Saatgut-Treuhandverwaltungsgesellschaft mbH and
Werner Jäger, on the interpretation of
the sixth indent of
Article 14(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 of 27
July 1994 on Community plant variety rights (OJ 1994 L 227,
p. 1) and of Articles 3(2) and 8 of Commission Regulation

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.