Case C-17/06: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Nancy by judgment of that court of  9 January 2006  in S.A.R.L. CELINE v S.A. CELINE
Date: 2006-03-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: brand name, interpretation of the law, trade-mark law

25.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/5

3. If Question 1 is to be answered in the negative: Is Article 15
of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001
on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar
sector to be interpreted as meaning that, when determining
both the exportable surplus and the average loss per tonne
of sugar, all exports are to be taken into account, even
where no export refunds were paid in respect of a portion
of those exports in the relevant marketing year?

4. If Questions 1, 2 or 3 are to be answered in the affirmative:
Is Commission Regulation (EC) No 1775/2004 (4) of 14
October 2004 setting the production levies in the sugar
sector for the 2003/04 marketing year invalid?

(1) OJ L 178, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 50, p 40.
(3) OJ L 160, p. 33.
(4) OJ L 316, p 64.

Appeal brought on 11 January 2006 by the Regione
Siciliana against
the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities (First Chamber,
Extended Composition) of 18 October 2005 in Case T-60/
the European
03 Regione Siciliana v Commission of

the judgment of

Communities

(Case C-15/06 P)

(2006/C 74/11)

(Language of the case: Italian)

2.

in any event, order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant claims that the contested judgment is flawed by
reason of:

1.

2.

infringement and erroneous application of Articles 18(1)
and 32(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1787/84 (1) of 19
June 1984 on the European Regional Development Fund, as
amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3641/85 (2) of 20
December 1985;

infringement and erroneous application of Article 24 of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December
1988 (3)
laying down provisions for implementing Regu-
lation (EEC) No 2052/88 (4) as regards coordination of the
activities of the different Structural Funds between them-
selves and with the operations of the European Investment
Bank and the other existing financial
instruments, as
amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 (5) of 20
July 1984;

3.

inaccurate statement of reasons on a key issue of
dispute.

the

(1) No longer in force.
(2) No longer in force.
(3) No longer in force.
(4) No longer in force.
(5) OJ L 193 of 31.7.1993, p. 20.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel
de Nancy by judgment of that court of 9 January 2006 in
S.A.R.L. CELINE v S.A. CELINE

the European Communities

An appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance
(First Chamber, Extended
of
Composition) of 18 October 2005 in Case T-60/03 Regione
Siciliana v Commission of the European Communities was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
11 January 2006 by the Regione Siciliana, represented by I.M.
Braguglia, acting as Agent, and G. Aiello, avvocato dello Stato

(Case C-17/06)

(2006/C 74/12)

The appellant claims that the Court should:

(Language of the case: French)

1. set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance and
consequently annul
the Commission Decision C (2002)
4905 of 11 December 2002 relating to the cancellation of
the aid granted by the European Regional Development
Fund, ERDF, as infrastructure investment, for a sum no less
than ECU 15 million,
in Italy (region: Sicily), and to the
recovery of the advance on that assistance made by the
Commission, and order the release of the balance;

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by judgment of the Cour d'appel de Nancy
the Court Registry on 17
of 9 January 2006, received at
January 2006,
for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
between S.A.R.L. CELINE and S.A. CELINE on the following
question:

C 74/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.3.2006

Must Article 5(1) of Directive 89/104/EEC (1) be interpreted as
meaning that the adoption, by a third party without authorisa-
tion, of a registered word mark, as a company name, business
name or style in connection with the marketing of identical
goods, amounts to use of that mark in the course of trade,
which the proprietor is entitled to stop by reason of his exclu-
sive rights?

Cristal Union v Directeur général des douanes et droits
indirects and Receveur principal des douanes et droits
indirects

Sucrerie Bourdon v Directeur général des douanes et
droits indirects and Receveur principal des douanes et
droits indirects

(1) 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)

Sucrerie de Bourgogne SA v Directeur général des
douanes et droits indirects and Receveur principal des
douanes et droits indirects

SAS Vermendoise Industries v Directeur général des
douanes et droits indirects and Receveur principal des
douanes et droits indirects

References for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de
Grande Instance de Nanterre by judgments of that court
of 5 January 2006 in

Sucreries et Raffineries d'Erstein SA v Directeur général
des douanes et droits indirects and Receveur principal des
douanes et droits indirects

Société Saint Louis Sucre SNC v Directeur général des
douanes et droits indirects and Receveur principal des
douanes et droits indirects

Societe des Sucreries du Marquenterre SA v Directeur
général des douanes et droits indirects and Receveur prin-
cipal des douanes et droits indirects

SA des Sucreries de Fontaine Le Dun, Bolbec, Auffay
(SAFBA) v Directeur général des douanes et droits indir-
ects and Receveur principal des douanes et droits indirects

Lesaffre Frères SA v Directeur général des douanes et
droits indirects and Receveur principal des douanes et
droits indirects

Sucreries, Distilleries des Hauts de France v Directeur
général des douanes et droits indirects and Receveur prin-
cipal des douanes et droits indirects

Sucreries & Distilleries de Souppes — Ouvré Fils SA v
Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects and
Receveur principal des douanes et droits indirects

Sucreries de Toury et usines annexes SA v Directeur
général des douanes et droits indirects and Receveur prin-
cipal des douanes et droits indirects

Tereos v Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects
and Receveur principal des douanes et droits indirects

(Case C-23/06)

(Case C-24/06)

(Case C-25/06)

(Case C-26/06)

(Case C-27/06)

(Case C-28/06)

(Case C-29/06)

(Case C-30/06)

(Case C-31/06)

(Case C-32/06)

(Case C-33/06)

(Case C-34/06)

(Case C-35/06)

(Case C-36/06)

(2006/C 74/13)

(Language of the cases: French)

References have been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by judgments of the Tribunal de Grande
Instance de Nanterre delivered on 5 January 2006, received at
the Court Registry on 20 January 2006, for a preliminary
ruling in the following cases:

SAS Sucrerie du Littoral Groupe S.D.H.F v Directeur
général des douanes et droits indirects and Receveur prin-
cipal des douanes et droits indirects

— Société Saint Louis Sucre SNC v Directeur général des
douanes et droits indirects and Receveur principal des
douanes et droits indirects (Case C-23/06)