Case C-275/05: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 October 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Sigmaringen — Germany) — Alois Kibler jun. v Land Baden-Württemberg (Milk and milk products — Article 5c of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 — Additional levy in the milk and milk products sector — Regulations (EEC) Nos 857/84, 590/85 and 1546/88 — Transfer of the reference quantity following the return of part of a holding — Landlord who is not himself a producer of milk or milk products — Rural lease voluntarily brought to an end)
Date: 2006-12-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural quota, dairy production, farm lease, interpretation of the law

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/15

for

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 October
a preliminary ruling from the
2006 (reference
Hessisches Finanzgericht, Kassel
(Germany)) — Turbon
International GmbH, as universal successor in title to
Kores Nordic Deutschland GmbH v Oberfinanzdirektion
Koblenz

(Case C-250/05) (1)

(Common Customs Tariff — Tariff headings — Classification
in the Combined Nomenclature of ink cartridges compatible
with Epson Stylus Color printers — Inks (heading 3215) —
Parts and accessories of machines of heading 8471 (heading
8473)

(2006/C 326/29)

Language of the case: German

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 October 2006
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gericht Sigmaringen — Germany) — Alois Kibler jun. v
Land Baden-Württemberg

(Case C-275/05) (1)

(Milk and milk products — Article 5c of Regulation (EEC) No
levy in the milk and milk products
804/68 — Additional
sector — Regulations
(EEC) Nos 857/84, 590/85 and
1546/88 — Transfer of the reference quantity following the
return of part of a holding — Landlord who is not himself a
producer of milk or milk products — Rural lease voluntarily
brought to an end)

Referring court

Hessisches Finanzgericht, Kassel

Parties to the main proceedings

(2006/C 326/30)

Language of the case: German

Applicant: Turbon International GmbH, as universal successor in
title to Kores Nordic Deutschland GmbH

Referring court

Defendant: Oberfinanzdirektion Koblenz

Verwaltungsgericht Sigmaringen

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hessisches Finanzgericht
(Finance Court, Hesse), Kassel — Interpretation of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and
statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ
1987 L 256, p.1) — Subheading No 3215 90 80 (‘Ink, other
than printing ink, writing or drawing ink’) and Heading No
8473 (‘Parts and accessories of the machines of heading No
8471’, that is automatic data-processing machines and units
thereof) — Ink cartridge

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Alois Kibler jun.

Defendant: Land Baden-Württemberg

Operative part of the judgment

Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987
on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common
Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No
1734/96 of 9 September 1996, must be interpreted as meaning that
an ink cartridge without an integrated print head consisting of plastic
casing, foam, a metal screen, seals, tape seal, labels, ink and packing
material, which, as regards both the cartridge and the ink, can only be
used in a printer with the same characteristics as Epson Stylus Color
inkjet printers, must be classified under Subheading 3215 90 80 of
the Combined Nomenclature.

(1) OJ C 217, 3.9.2005.

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht
Sigmaringen — Interpretation of Article 7(1) of Council Regu-
lation (EEC) No 857/84 of 31 March 1984 adopting general
rules for the application of the levy referred to in Article 5c of
Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 in the milk and milk products
sector (OJ 1984 L 90, p. 13), as amended by Council Regulation
(EEC) No 590/85 of 26 February 1985 (OJ 1985 L 68, p. 1),
and of Article 7(2), (3) and (4) of Commission Regulation (EEC)
No 1546/88 of 3 June 1988 laying down detailed rules for the
application of the additional levy referred to in Article 5c of
Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 (OJ 1988 L 139, p. 12) — Return
to a landlord, who is not himself a producer, of part of a dairy
farm which has been let out — Transfer of the reference quan-
tity which is attached thereto

C 326/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.12.2006

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 7(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 857/84 of 31
March 1984 adopting general rules for the application of the levy
referred to in Article 5c of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 in the
milk and milk products sector, as amended by Council Regulation
(EEC) No 590/85 of 26 February 1985, and points 2, 3 and 4
of the first subparagraph of Article 7 of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 1546/88 of 3 June 1988 laying down detailed rules
for the application of the additional levy referred to in Article 5c of
Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 are to be interpreted as meaning
that on the return of a leased part of a holding the corresponding
reference quantity for that part cannot pass to the landlord if he is
not a milk producer, does not intend to carry out such an activity
and does not intend to grant a lease for the undertaking concerned
to a milk producer.

2. Article 7(1) of Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation
No 590/85, and point 4 of the first subparagraph of Article 7 of
Regulation No 1546/88 preclude the reference quantity from being
retained by the tenant on the ending of a rural lease, where the
lease has been voluntarily brought to an end.

(1) OJ C 229, 17.09.2005.

Article 5(1) and (3) 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) — Right of the
proprietor of a trade mark to prohibit the transit of goods
bearing an identical sign across the territory of a Member State
where that mark is protected — No protection in the country of
destination

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 5(1) and (3) of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21
December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States
relating to trade marks is to be interpreted as meaning that the
proprietor of a trade mark can prohibit
through a
Member State in which that mark is protected (the Federal Republic
of Germany in the present case) of goods bearing the trade mark
and placed under the external transit procedure, whose destination
is another Member State where the mark is not so protected
(Ireland in the present case), only if those goods are subject to the
act of a third party while they are placed under the external transit
procedure which necessarily entails their being put on the market in
that Member State of transit.

the transit

2. It is in that regard,

in principle, irrelevant whether goods whose
destination is a Member State come from an associated State or a
third country, or whether those goods have been manufactured in
the country of origin lawfully or in infringement of the existing
trade mark rights of the proprietor in that country.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 November
2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundes-
gerichtshof — Germany) — Montex Holdings Ltd v Diesel
SpA

(1) OJ C 243, 01.10.2005.

(Case C-281/05) (1)

(Trade marks — Directive 89/104/EEC — Right of the
proprietor of a trade mark to prohibit the transit of goods
bearing an identical sign through the territory of a Member
State in which the mark enjoys protection — Unlawful manu-
facture — Associated State)

(2006/C 326/31)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Montex Holdings Ltd

Defendant: Diesel SpA

Re:

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 October
the European Communities v
2006 — Commission of

Italian Republic

(Case C-302/05) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
2000/35/EC — Article 4(1) — Retention of title — Enforce-
ability)

(2006/C 326/32)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: B. Schima and D. Recchia, Agents)

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesgerichtshof —
Interpretation of Articles 28, 29 and 30 of the EC Treaty and of

Defendant:
Agent, and M. Massella Ducci Teri, avocat)

Italian Republic (represented by:

I.M. Braguglia,