Case C-328/06: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 November 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil — Spain) — Alfredo Nieto Nuño v Leonci Monlleó Franquet (Trade marks — Directive 89/104/EEC — Article 4(2)(d) — Well-known marks in a Member State within the meaning of Article 6 bis of the Paris Convention — Knowledge of the trade mark — Geographical area)
Date: 2007-11-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: approximation of laws, interpretation of the law, trade mark, trade-mark law

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/9

Operative part of the judgment

The first paragraph of Article 27 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a
common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks
and services (Framework Directive) and Article 16(1)(a) of Directive
2002/22/EC of
the Council of
the European Parliament and of
7 March 2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to elec-
tronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Direc-
tive) must be interpreted as meaning that a statutory requirement for
the approval of tariffs for the supply of retail voice telephony services
provided by undertakings with a dominant position in that market,
such as that provided for in Paragraph 25 of the Law on Telecommu-
nications (Telekommunikationsgesetz) of 25 July 1996, enacted by
national
law and preceding the regulatory framework resulting from
those directives, together with administrative measures confirming that
requirement, must be temporarily maintained.

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December
a preliminary ruling from the
2007 (reference
(Germany)) — Ursula Voß v
Bundesverwaltungsgericht

for

civil servants), which is lower
received if
context of
against female workers

than that which would be
the same number of hours were worked in the
full-time employment — Indirect discrimination

Operative part of the judgment

Article 141 EC is to be interpreted as precluding national legislation
on the remuneration of civil servants, such as that at issue in the main
proceedings — which defines overtime, for both full-time civil servants
and part-time civil servants, as hours worked over and above their
normal working hours, and which remunerates those additional hours
at a rate lower than the hourly rate applied to their normal working
hours, so that part-time civil servants are less well paid than full-time
civil servants in respect of hours which are worked over and above their
normal working hours, but which are not sufficient
to bring the
number of hours worked overall above the level of normal working
hours for full-time civil servants — where:

— in the group of workers subject to that legislation, a considerably
higher percentage of women is affected as compared with the
percentage of men so affected;

and

— the difference in treatment

is not

justified by objective factors

wholly unrelated to discrimination based on sex.

Land Berlin

(Case C-300/06) (1)

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.

(Article 141 EC — Principle of equal pay for men and women
— Civil servants — Overtime — Indirect discrimination
against women employed part-time)

(2008/C 22/16)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ursula Voß

Defendant: Land Berlin

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesverwaltungsgericht
— Interpretation of Article 141 of the EC Treaty — National
legislation laying down,
for both full-time and part-time
workers, a reduction in the remuneration for overtime as
against that received for normal working hours — Remunera-
tion of a female part-time teacher, who is a civil servant, who
works overtime (but not sufficient to bring the hours worked
overall above the level of normal working hours for full-time

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 November
2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado
de lo Mercantil — Spain) — Alfredo Nieto Nuño v
Leonci Monlleó Franquet

(Case C-328/06) (1)

(Trade marks — Directive 89/104/EEC — Article 4(2)(d) —
‘Well-known’ marks in a Member State within the meaning
of Article 6 bis of the Paris Convention — Knowledge of the
trade mark — Geographical area)

(2008/C 22/17)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Alfredo Nieto Nuño

Defendant: Leonci Monlleó Franquet

C 22/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.1.2008

Re:

Operative part of the judgment

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado de lo Mercantil —
Interpretation of Article 4 of 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) — Meaning
of
‘well known’ — Whether knowledge and use may be
confined to a limited territory, such as an autonomous com-
munity, a region, an area or a city, depending on the goods or
services concerned and the public for whom the mark is
intended

Operative part of the judgment

of

Article 4(2)(d)
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 earlier
trade mark must be well known throughout
the
Member State of registration or in a substantial part of it.

the territory of

(1) OJ C 237, 30.9.2006.

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay, in
the Federal Republic of

those of

addition to its own costs,
Germany.

(1) OJ C 294, 2.12.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 November
2007 — Italian Republic v Commission of the European
Communities

(Case C-417/06 P) (1)

(Appeal — Admissibility — Structural Funds — Financing of
Community initiatives — Amendment of indicative allocations
— Enforcement of the final judgment)

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 December
the European Communities v
2007 — Commission of

Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-401/06) (1)

Parties

(2008/C 22/19)

Language of the case: italian

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Taxation
— Sixth VAT Directive — Supply of services — Executor of a
will — Place where the service is performed — Article 9(1)
and (2)(e))

(2008/C 22/18)

Appellant: Italian Republic (represented by: I. Braguglia, Agent,
D. Del Gaizo and G. Albenzio, avvocati dello Stato)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
the European
Communities (represented by: E. de March and L. Flynn, Agents,
and A. Dal Ferro, avvocato)

Language of the case: German

Re:

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: D. Triantafyllou, Agent)

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M.
Lumma, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement
of Article 9(2)(e) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of
17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member
States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value
added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1)
— Services supplied by executors for customers established
outside the Community or for taxable persons established in the
Community but not in the same country as the supplier —
Place of supply of services — Characterisation of activities of
executors

the Court of First Instance
Appeal against the judgment of
(Fourth Chamber) of 13 July 2006 in Case T-225/04 Italy v
Commission dismissing the action for annulment of Commission
Decision C(2003) 3971 final of 26 November 2003 establishing
the
indicative allocations between the Member States of
commitment appropriations under Community initiatives for
the period 1994-1999 and of all related prior measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay its own costs and those of the

Commission of the European Communities.

(1) OJ C 310 of 16.12.2006.