Case C-456/06: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 April 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Peek & Cloppenburg KG v Cassina SpA (Copyright — Directive 2001/29/EC — Article 4(1) — Distribution to the public by sale or otherwise of the original of a work or a copy thereof — Use of reproductions of copyright-protected furniture as items of furniture exhibited in a sales area and in display windows — No transfer of ownership or possession)
Date: 2008-04-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: copyright, free movement of goods, interpretation of the law, law relating to information, reprography

7.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/7

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesgerichtshof —
the
Interpretation of Article 3 of Directive 1999/44/EC of
European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on
certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated
guarantees (OJ 1999 L 171, p. 12) — Entitlement under
national law of a seller to seek compensation from consumers
for the use of goods not in conformity with the sale contract
during the period before their replacement

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3 of Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of
the sale of
consumer goods and associated guarantees is to be interpreted as
legislation under which a seller who has sold
precluding national
consumer goods which are not in conformity may require the consumer
to pay compensation for the use of those defective goods until their
replacement with new goods.

(1) OJ C 310, 16.12.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 24 April 2008
— Kingdom of Belgium v Commission of the European
Communities

(Case C-418/06 P) (1)

(Appeal — EAGGF — Arable crop sector — Clearance of
EAGGF accounts — Reliable and operational
inspection
system — Expenditure excluded from Community financing
— Flat-rate correction — Retrospective application of the
rules relating to checks — Implicit obligations — Principle of
proportionality — Legal certainty — Unlimited jurisdiction)

the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund
(EAGGF) (OJ 2004 L 40, p. 31), in so far as it imposes a flat-
rate correction of 2 % of the expenditure declared by Belgium
in respect of arable crops.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal.

2. Orders the Kingdom of Belgium and the Commission of

the

European Communities to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 2.12.2006.

the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 April
Judgment of
2008 (reference for
a preliminary ruling from the
Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Peek & Cloppenburg
KG v Cassina SpA

(Case C-456/06) (1)

(Copyright — Directive 2001/29/EC — Article 4(1) —
Distribution to the public by sale or otherwise of the original
of a work or a copy thereof — Use of reproductions of copy-
right-protected furniture as items of furniture exhibited in a
sales area and in display windows — No transfer of ownership
or possession)

(2008/C 142/10)

Language of the case: German

(2008/C 142/09)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties

Appellant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: A. Hubert and
L. Van den Broeck, Agents, H. Gilliams, P. de Bandt and L.
Goossens, avocats)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg KG

Defendant: Cassina SpA

the European
Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities (represented by: M. Nolin and L. Visaggio, Agents)

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment delivered by the Court of
First
Instance (Second Chamber) on 25 July 2006 in Case
T-221/04 Belgium v Commission, by which the Court of First
Instance dismissed the application for partial annulment of
Commission Decision 2004/136/EC of 4 February 2004
excluding from Community financing certain expenditure
incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesgerichtshof —
Interpretation of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC and of Article 4(1)
of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain
aspects of copyright and related rights in the information
society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10) — Use, without the consent of
the copyright holder, of reproductions of copyright-protected
items of furniture as furnishings arranged in a sales area and for
decorative display purposes — Whether such use, which does
not involve any form of transfer of ownership or possession,
does or does not constitute a ‘form of distribution to the public’

C 142/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.6.2008

Operative part of the judgment

for

the original of a work or a copy thereof,

The concept of distribution to the public, otherwise than through sale,
the purpose of
of
Article 4(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain
aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society,
applies only where there is a transfer of the ownership of that object.
As a result, neither granting to the public the right to use reproduc-
tions of a work protected by copyright nor exhibiting to the public
those reproductions without actually granting a right to use them can
constitute such a form of distribution.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 April 2008
(references for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht
Bozen (Italy)) — Othmar Michaeler (C-55/07 and C-56/07),
Subito GmbH (C-55/07 and C-56/07), Ruth Volgger
(C-56/07) v Amt für sozialen Arbeitsschutz, Autonome
der
Provinz

Arbeitsinspektorat

(formerly

Bozen

Autonomen Provinz Bozen)

(Joined Cases C-55/07 and C-56/07) (1)

(Directive 97/81/EC — Equal treatment of part-time and
full-time workers — Discrimination — Administrative
obstacle limiting opportunities for part-time work)

(2008/C 142/11)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht Bozen

ties, which imposes a fine for failure to do so — Obligation of
the Member States to eliminate legal and administrative obsta-
cles which may limit the opportunities for part-time work —
Principle of equal treatment of part-time and full-time workers

Operative part of the judgment

Clause 5(1)(a) of
the Framework Agreement on part-time work
concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC annexed to Council Direc-
tive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework
Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the
ETUC must be interpreted as precluding national legislation such as
that at issue in the main proceedings which requires that copies of
part-time employment contracts be sent
to the authorities within
30 days of their signature.

(1) OJ C 95, 28.4.2007.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 April 2008 —
Ferrero Deutschland GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Cornu SA
Fontain

(Case C-108/07 P) (1)

(Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Likelihood of confusion —
Application for Community word mark FERRO — Opposition
by the proprietor of the earlier national word mark FERRERO
— Evidence of the enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier
mark)

(2008/C 142/12)

Language of the case: French

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties

Applicants: Othmar Michaeler (C-55/07 and C-56/07), Subito
GmbH (C-55/07 and C-56/07), Ruth Volgger (C-56/07)

Appellant:
M. Schaeffer, Rechtsanwalt)

Ferrero Deutschland GmbH (represented

by:

Defendant: Amt für sozialen Arbeitsschutz, Autonome Provinz
Bozen (formerly Arbeitsinspektorat der Autonomen Provinz
Bozen)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the
(represented by:
(Trade Marks and Designs)
Internal Market
A. Rassat, Agent), Cornu SA Fontain

Re:

Re:

law and,

of Community

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Landesgericht Bolzano —
Interpretation
particular,
Article 137 EC and Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December
1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work
concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Annex: Frame-
work agreement on part-time work (OJ 1998 L 14, p. 9) —
National legislation requiring employers to send a copy of part-
time employment contracts to the competent national authori-

in

Appeal against the judgment of
the Court of First Instance
(Third Chamber) of 15 December 2006 in Case T-310/04
Ferrero Deutschland v OHIM and Cornu in proceedings against the
decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 March
2004 (Case R 540/2002-4) relating to opposition proceedings
between Ferrero OHG mbH and Cornu SA Fontain — Interpre-
tation of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of