Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 47/8 EN Official Journal of the European Union 21.2.2004

Regulation (EC) No 241/1999 of 25 January 1999 (OJ
1999 L 27, p. 1), the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of:
D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur), acting for the President of the
Fifth Chamber, A. La Pergola and P. Jann, Judges; D. RuizJarabo Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has
given a judgment on 7 January 2004, in which it has ruled:

1. _Articles 2 and 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 3295/94 of_
_22 December 1994 laying down measures concerning the entry_
_into the Community and the export and re-export from the_
_Community of goods infringing certain intellectual property_
_rights, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 241/1999_
_of 25 January 1999, are applicable to situations in which_
_goods in transit between two countries not belonging to the_
_European Community are temporarily detained in a Member_
_State by the customs authorities of that State._

2. _The duty to interpret national law so as to be compatible with_
_Community law, in the light of its wording and purpose, in_
_order to attain the aim pursued by the latter, cannot, of itself_
_and independently of a law adopted by a Member State, have_
_the effect of determining or aggravating the liability in criminal_
_law of an entity which has failed to meet the requirements of_
_Regulation No 3295/94._

( [1] ) OJ C 131 of 1.6.2002.

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT**

**(Fifth Chamber)**

**of 7 January 2004**

**in Case C-100/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from**
**the Bundesgerichtshof): Gerolsteiner Brunnen GmbH &**
**Co. v Putsch GmbH** ( [1] )

_**(Directive 89/104/EEC — Limitation of the effects of a trade**_
_**mark in relation to indications concerning geographical**_
_**origin — Use of a geographical indication as a trade mark**_
_**as an element of use in accordance with ‘honest practices in**_
_**industrial or commercial matters’)**_

(2004/C 47/13)

_(Language of the case: German)_

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

In Case C-100/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Gerolsteiner Brunnen GmbH & Co. and Putsch GmbH, on the

interpretation of Article 6(1)(b) of First 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), the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, acting
for the President of the Fifth Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans
and D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur), Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 January 2004, in which
it has ruled:

_Article 6(1)(b) of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 Decem-_
_ber 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to_
_trade marks is to be interpreted as meaning that, where there exists a_
_likelihood of aural confusion between a word mark registered in one_
_Member State and an indication, in the course of trade, of the_
_geographical origin of a product originating in another Member_
_State, the proprietor of the trade mark may, pursuant to Article 5 of_
_Directive 89/104, prevent the use of the indication of geographical_
_origin only if that use is not in accordance with honest practices in_
_industrial or commercial matters. It is for the national court to carry_
_out an overall assessment of all the circumstances of the particular_
_case in that regard._

( [1] ) OJ C 144 of 15.6.2002.

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT**

**(Fifth Chamber)**

**of 7 January 2004**

**in Case C-201/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from**
**the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen’s**
**Bench Division (Administrative Court): The Queen on**
**the application of Delena Wells v Secretary of State for**
**Transport, Local Government and the Regions** ( [1] )

_**(Directive 85/337/EEC — Assessment of the effects of**_
_**certain projects on the environment — National measure**_
_**granting consent for mining operations without an environ-**_
_**mental impact assessment being carried out — Direct effect**_
_**of directives Triangular situation)**_

(2004/C 47/14)

_(Language of the case: English)_

In Case C-201/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s