Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 April 2004 in Case C-224/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus): Heikki Antero Pusa v Osuuspankkien Keskinäinen Vakuutusyhtiö (Citizenship of the Union — Article 18 EC — Right to move freely and to reside in the Member States — Attachment of remuneration — Detailed rules)
Date: 2004-04-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: debt, free movement of persons, interpretation of the law, national law, residence permit, seizure of goods, tax on income

C 118/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 29 April 2004

in Case C-224/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Korkein oikeus): Heikki Antero Pusa v Osuuspankkien
Keskinäinen Vakuutusyhtiö (1)

(Citizenship of the Union — Article 18 EC — Right to move
freely and to reside in the Member States — Attachment of
remuneration — Detailed rules)

(Sixth Chamber)

of 29 April 2004

in Case C-371/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Svea hovrätt): Björnekulla Fruktindustrier AB v
Procordia Food AB (1)

(2004/C 118/41)

(Language of the case: Finnish)

(Trade marks — Directive 89/104/EEC — Article 12(2)(a)
— Revocation of rights conferred by the trade mark — Trade
mark which has become the common name in the trade —
Relevant classes of persons for purposes of the assessment)

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

In Case C-224/02: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Korkein oikeus (Finland) for a preliminary ruling in the
proceedings pending before that court between Heikki Antero
Pusa and Osuuspankkien Keskinäinen Vakuutusyhtiö on the
interpretation of Article 18 EC — the Court (Fifth Chamber),
composed of: P. Jann, acting as President of the Fifth Chamber,
C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas, A. La Pergola (Rapporteur) and
S. von Bahr,
Jacobs, Advocate General; H. von
Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a judg-
ment on 29 April 2004, in which it has ruled:

Judges; F.G.

1. Community law in principle precludes legislation of a Member
State under which the attachable part of a pension paid at regular
intervals in that State to a debtor is calculated by deducting from
that pension the income tax prepayment levied in that State, while
the tax which the holder of such a pension must pay on it subse-
quently in the Member State where he resides is not taken into
account at all
the purposes of calculating the attachable
portion of that pension;

for

2. On the other hand, Community law does not preclude such
national legislation if it provides for tax to be taken into account,
where taking the tax into account is made subject to the condition
that the debtor prove that he has in fact paid or is required to pay
within a given period a specified amount as income tax in the
Member State where he resides. However, that is only the case to
the extent that, first, the right of the debtor concerned to have tax
taken into account is clear from that legislation; secondly, the
detailed rules for taking tax into account are such as to guarantee
to the interested party the right to obtain an annual adjustment of
the attachable portion of his pension to the same extent as if such
a tax had been deducted at source in the Member State which
enacted that legislation; and, thirdly, those detailed rules do not
have the effect of making it impossible or excessively difficult to
exercise that right.

(2004/C 118/42)

(Language of the case: Swedish)

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

In Case C-371/02: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
from the Svea hovrätt (Svea Court of Appeal) (Sweden) for a
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court
between Björnekulla Fruktindustrier AB and Procordia Food AB
— on the interpretation of Article 12(2)(a) of 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 (Sixth Chamber) composed of: V.
the Sixth Chamber,
the President of
Skouris, acting as
C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, J.-P. Puissochet
and R. Schintgen, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; H. von
Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a judg-
ment on 29 April 2004, in which it has ruled:

Article 12(2)(a) of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21
December 1988 to approximate the laws of
the Member States
relating to trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that in cases
where intermediaries participate in the distribution to the consumer or
the end user of a product which is the subject of a registered trade
mark, the relevant classes of persons whose views fall to be taken into
account
trade mark has become the
common name in the trade for the product in question comprise all
consumers and end users and, depending on the features of the market
concerned, all those in the trade who deal with that product commer-
cially.

in determining whether that

(1) OJ C 202, 24.8.2002.

(1) OJ C 305, 7.12.2002.