Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 274/14 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9.11.2002

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT**

**(Sixth Chamber)**

**of 19 September 2002**

**in Case C-433/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling**
**from the Landgericht Köln): Aventis Pharma Deutschland**
**GmbH v Kohlpharma GmbH, MTK Pharma Vertriebs-**
**GmbH** ( [1] )

_**(Trade mark rights — Medicinal products — Centralmarket-**_
_**ing authorisation — Repackaging)**_

(2002/C 274/22)

_(Language of the case: German)_

_(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published_
_in the European Court Reports)_

In Case C-433/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Landgericht Köln (Germany) for a preliminary ruling
in the proceedings pending before that court between Aventis
Pharma Deutschland GmbH and Kohlpharma GmbH, MTK
Pharma Vertriebs-GmbH, on the interpretation of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93 of 22 July 1993 laying down
Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision
of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and
establishing a European Agency forthe Evaluation of Medicinal
Products (OJ 1993 L 214, p. 1) and of the rules of Community
law on the free movement of medicinal products, the Court
(Sixth Chamber), composed of: F. Macken, President of the
Chamber, N. Colneric, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet and V. Skouris, Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate General;
H. A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has
given a judgment on 19 September 2002, in which it has
ruled:

_Council Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93 of 22 July 1993 laying_
_down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of_
_medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a_
_European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products precludes_
_a medicinal product which is the subject of two separate central_
_marketing authorisations, one for packs of five items and the other_
_for packs of 10 items, from being marketed in a package consisting_
_of two packs of five items which have been joined together and_
_relabelled._

( [1] ) OJ C 45 of 10.2.2001.

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT**

**(Sixth Chamber)**

**of 19 September 2002**

**in Case C-221/01: Commission of the European Communi-**
**ties v Kingdom of Belgium** ( [1] )

_**(Directive 97/33/EC — Telecommunications — Intercon-**_
_**nection of networks — Interoperability of services)**_

(2002/C 274/23)

_(Language of the case: French)_

_(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published_
_in the European Court Reports)_

In Case C-221/01, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: H. van Lier) v Kingdom of Belgium (Agent: initially
F. van de Craen, and, subsequently, A. Snoecx): Application
for a declaration that, by failing to adopt all the laws,
regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply
with Directive 97/33/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 30 June 1997 on interconnection in
Telecommunications with regard to ensuring universal service
and interoperability through application of the principles of
Open Network Provision (ONP) (OJ 1997 L 199, p. 32) and,
in particular, with Articles 7(5), 9(3) and 14(1) and (2) thereof,
the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations
under that directive, the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:
F. Macken, President of the Chamber, N. Colneric, C. Gulmann
(Rapporteur), R. Schintgen and V. Skouris, Judges; F. G. Jacobs,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 19 September 2002, in which it:

1. _Declares that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and_
_administrative provisions necessary to comply with Articles 7(5)_
_and 9(3) of Directive 97/33/EC of the European Parliament_
_and of the Council of 30 June 1997 on interconnection in_
_Telecommunications with regard to ensuring universal service_
_and interoperability through application of the principles of_
_Open Network Provision (ONP), as well as Article 14(1) in_
_conjunctionwith Article 12(4) thereof, the Kingdom of Belgium_
_has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;_

2. _Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs._

( [1] ) OJ C 227 of 11.8.2001.