Case C-302/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht München (Germany) lodged on 8 July 2008 — Zino Davidoff SA v Bundesfinanzdirektion Südost
Date: 2008-07-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, customs regulations, intellectual property, interpretation of the law, trade-mark law

C 247/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

27.9.2008

In view of the foregoing, the Commission is of the view that the
Czech legislation constitutes a measure having equivalent effect
to a quantitative restriction within the meaning of Article 28 EC.
That measure is incapable of procuring the protection of the
health and life of humans and the environment or road safety
and is thus not justified by Article 30 of the EC Treaty or by the
case-law of the European Court of Justice.

(1) Law No 56/2001 Coll. on conditions for operating vehicles on roads
and on changes in Law No 168/1999 Coll. on liability insurance for
damage caused by operating a vehicle and on changes in various
related laws (‘Law on liability insurance for operating a vehicle’), as
amended by Law No 307/1999 Coll.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
lodged on 8 July 2008 — Zino
München (Germany)

Davidoff SA v Bundesfinanzdirektion Südost

(Case C-302/08)

(2008/C 247/08)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Zino Davidoff SA

Defendant: Bundesfinanzdirektion Südost

Question referred

In the light of the accession of the European Community to the
Madrid Protocol,
is Article 5(4) of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1383/2003 of 22 July 2003, concerning customs action
against goods suspected of infringing certain intellectual prop-
erty rights and the measures to be taken against goods found to
have infringed such rights (1), to be interpreted as meaning that,
despite the use of the term ‘Community trade mark’, marks with
international registrations within the meaning of Article 146
et seq. of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December
1993 on the Community trade mark, as amended by Council
Regulation (EC) No 1992/2003 of 27 October 2003, are also
covered?

(1) OJ 2003 L 196, p. 7.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundes-
verwaltungsgericht (Deutschland) lodged on 8 July 2008 —
Metin Bozkurt v Land Baden-Württemberg

(Case C-303/08)

(2008/C 247/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Metin Bozkurt

Defendant: Land Baden-Württemberg

Other party: Der Vertreter des Bundesinteresses beim Bundes-
verwaltungsgericht

Questions referred

1. Is the right of residence and employment acquired as a
member of the family pursuant to the second indent of the
first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the
EEC-Turkey Association Council by the spouse of a Turkish
worker who is duly registered as belonging to the labour
force of a Member State retained even after a divorce?

If the reply to the first question is in the affirmative:

2. Is it an abuse of rights to plead the right of residence derived
from his former wife under the second indent of the first
the
paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of
EEC-Turkey Association Council where the Turkish national
raped and injured his former wife after acquiring the legal
status and the offence was punished with two years' impri-
sonment?

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundes-
gerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 9 July 2008 — Zentrale
zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs eV v Plus
Warenhandelsgesellschaft mbH

(Case C-304/08)

(2008/C 247/10)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof