Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 303/2 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 27.10.2001

3. For the purposes of determining the five Judges who are _Sixth Chamber_
to sit in each case assigned to a large Chamber, that is to say,
(President: Judge Macken)
the Fifth and Sixth Chamber (to each of which seven Judges
are attached), a list shall be drawn up for the judicial year. That
Mr Gulmann, Mr Puissochet, Mr da Cunha Rodrigues,
list shall comprise all the Judges of the Chamber, apart from
Mr Schintgen, Mr Skouris and Ms Colneric, Judges.
the President, in the following order:

(a) the Judges of the small Chamber composed of four
**Appointment of the First Advocate General**
Judges, in order of seniority;

(b) the Judges of the other small Chamber, in the same order. In accordance with Article 10(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the
Court of Justice appointed Advocate General S. Alber as First
Advocate General for a period of one year starting on
For each case, the large Chamber shall be composed of: 7 October 2001.

—
the President,

—
the Judge-Rapporteur,

— **JUDGMENT OF THE COURT**
three Judges designated in the order set out in the relevant
list; the starting point on that list shall be moved down
one name at each general meeting. **of 13 September 2001**

**in Case C-89/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from**
Replacement of a Judge or Judges prevented from attending
**the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): Schieving-Nijstad vof**
shall be in the order set out in the list. However, should the **and Others v Robert Groeneveld** ( [1] )
President of a large Chamber be prevented from sitting, he
shall be replaced preferably by the President of the small
Chamber. _**(Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation —**_
_**Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement — Interpretation —**_
_**Direct effect — Application to proceedings pending at the**_
If the Court, or a Chamber, considers that a number of cases _**time of entry into force in the State concerned — Conditions**_
should be heard and determined together (whether or not they _**regarding the time-limit for bringing substantive proceed-**_
are formally joined), the composition of the bench shall be _**ings — Calculation of that time-limit)**_
that determined for the first of the cases discussed at a general
meeting. (2001/C 303/02)

4. For the period ending on 6 October 2002, the lists _(Language of the case: Dutch)_
referred to above are as follows:
_(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published_
_in the European Court Reports)_
_Third Chamber_

In Case C-89/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
(President: Judge Macken)
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the the Hoge Raad
der Nederlanden (Supreme Court of the Netherlands) for a
Mr Gulmann, Mr Puissochet and Mr da Cunha Rodrigues,
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
Judges
court between Schieving-Nijstad vof and Others and Robert
Groeneveld — on the interpretation of Article 50(6) of the
_Fourth Chamber_ Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
Rights, as set out in Annex 1 C to the Agreement establishing
(President: Judge von Bahr) the World Trade Organisation, approved on behalf of the
Community, as regards matters within its competence, by
Mr Edward, Mr La Pergola and Mr Timmermans, Judges Council Decision 94/800/EC of 22 December 1994 (OJ 1994
L 336, p. 1) — the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodrı´guez
Iglesias, President, C. Gulmann, A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet
_Fifth Chamber_ and V. Skouris (Presidents of Chambers), D.A.O. Edward
(Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet, P. Jann, L. Sevo´n, R. Schintgen,
(President: Judge Jann) F. Macken, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and
C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General;
Mr Edward, Mr La Pergola, Mr von Bahr, Mr Timmermans, L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
Mr Sevo´n and Mr Wathelet, Judges judgment on 13 September 2001, in which it has ruled:

27.10.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 303/3

1. _Where the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual_ _forbids the legal order of a Member State to provide, where_
_Property Rights (‘the TRIPs Agreement’), as set out in Annex 1_ _appropriate, that its judicial authorities are to determine of their_
_C to the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation,_ _own motion the period within which substantive proceedings_
_approved on behalf of the Community, as regards matters_ _are to be instituted at the same time as ordering provisional_
_within its competence, by Council Decision 94/800/EC of_ _measures, without any request by the defendant being necessary_
_22 December 1994, became applicable in the Member State_ _for that purpose._
_concerned at a time when the court of first instance has heard_
_the case but not yet delivered its decision, Article 50 of the TRIPs_ 6. _Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement neither requires nor_
_Agreement is applicable to the extent that the infringement of_
_forbids the Member States to provide, where appropriate, that_
_intellectual property rights continues beyond the date on which_
_its judicial authorities are to determine of their own motion the_
_the TRIPs Agreement became applicable with regard to the_
_period within which substantive proceedings are to be instituted._
_Community and the Member States._
_Since the provision in question is silent on that point, the scope_
_of the powers conferred on appellate courts in that regard falls_
_within the competence of each Member State._

2. _The procedural requirements of Article 50 of the TRIPs_
( [1] ) OJ C 136 of 15.5.1999.
_Agreement, and in particular Article 50(6), are not such as to_
_create rights upon which individuals may rely directly before the_
_Community courts and the courts of the Member States._
_Nevertheless, where the judicial authorities are called upon to_
_apply national rules with a view to ordering provisional_
_measures for the protection of intellectual property rights falling_
_within a field to which the TRIPs Agreement applies and in_
_respect of which the Community has already legislated, they are_
_required to do so as far as possible in the light of the wording_ **JUDGMENT OF THE COURT**
_and purpose of Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement, taking_
_account, more particularly, of all the circumstances of the case_
_before them, so as to ensure that a balance is struck between the_ **(Fifth Chamber)**
_competing rights and obligations of the intellectual property_
_right holder and of the defendant._
**of 13 September 2001**

**in Case C-374/99: Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the**
**European Communities** ( [1] )
3. _Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement is to be interpreted as_
_meaning that a request by the defendant is necessary in order_
_**(EAGGF — Clearance of accounts — 1995 financial year**_
_for the provisional measures ordered by way of interim relief to_
_**— Aid for consumption of olive oil — Premiums for sheep**_
_lapse on the ground that no substantive action has been brought_
_**and goats)**_
_either within the period prescribed in the provisional measures_
_or, where no period is prescribed, within 20 working days or_
_31 calendar days, whichever is the longer period._ (2001/C 303/03)

_(Language of the case: Spanish)_

4. _In the absence of any provision in the TRIPs Agreement_
_(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published_
_concerning the point in time at which the period of 20 working_
_in the European Court Reports)_
_days or 31 calendar days prescribed by Article 50(6) of that_
_agreement is to start, it is for each contracting party to_
_determine when that period is to start, provided always that it_ In Case C-374/99: Kingdom of Spain (Agent: M. Lo´pez-Monı´s
_is ‘reasonable’ having regard to the circumstances of each case_ Gallego) v Commission of the European Communities (Agent:
_and taking into account the balance to be struck between the_ J. Guerra Ferna´ndez) — application for partial annulment of
_competing rights and obligations of the intellectual property_ Commission Decision 1999/596/EC of 28 July 1999
_right holder and of the defendant._ amending Decision 1999/187/EC on the clearance of the
accounts presented by the Member States in respect of the
expenditure for 1995 of the Guarantee Section of the European
Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 1999
L 226, p. 26) in so far as it relates to the Kingdom of Spain —
5. _In the absence of any Community rule on the point and in_ the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola,
_accordance with Article 1(1) of the TRIPs Agreement, it is for_ President of the Chamber, M. Wathelet, D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann
_each Member State to determine the limits of the powers of the_ (Rapporteur) and L. Sevo´n, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate
_judicial_ _authorities_ _in_ _ordering_ _provisional_ _measures._ General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 13 Sep_Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement neither requires nor_ tember 2001, in which it: