Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 144/6 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15.6.2002

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT** _States relating to trade marks, as amended by the Agreement_
_on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992, must be_
_interpreted as meaning that a trade mark proprietor may rely_
**23 April 2002** _on its trade mark rights in order to prevent a parallel importer_
_from repackaging pharmaceutical products unless the exercise_
_of those rights contributes to artificial partitioning of the_
**in Case C-143/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from** _markets between Member States._
**the High Court of Justice): Boehringer Ingelheim KG,**
**Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma KG v Swingward Ltd, and** 2. _Replacement packaging of pharmaceutical products is objectively_
**between Boehringer Ingelheim KG, Boehringer Ingelheim** _necessary within the meaning of the Court’s case-law if, without_
**Pharma KG and Dowelhurst Ltd, and between Glaxo** _such repackaging, effective access to the market concerned, or to_
**Group Ltd and Swingward Ltd, and between Boehringer** _a substantial part of that market, must be considered to be_
**Ingelheim KG, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma KG and** _hindered as the result of strong resistance from a significant_
**Dowelhurst Ltd, and between Glaxo Group Ltd, The** _proportion of consumers to relabelled pharmaceutical products._
**Wellcome Foundation Ltd and Dowelhurst Ltd, and**
**between SmithKline Beecham plc, Beecham Group plc,** 3. _A parallel importer must, in any event, in order to be entitled_
**SmithKline & French Laboratories Ltd and Dowelhurst**
_to repackage trade-marked pharmaceutical products, fulfil the_
**Ltd and between Eli Lilly and Co. and Dowelhurst Ltd** ( [1] )
_requirement of prior notice. If the parallel importer does not_
_satisfy that requirement, the trade mark proprietor may oppose_
_the marketing of the repackaged pharmaceutical product. It is_
_**(Trade marks — Directive 89/104/EEC — Article 7(2) —**_ _incumbent on the parallel importer himself to give notice to the_
_**Exhaustion of the rights conferred by the trade mark**_ _trade mark proprietor of the intended repackaging. In the event_
_**— Pharmaceutical products — Parallel importation —**_ _of dispute, it is for the national court to assess, in the light of_
_**Repackaging of the trade-marked product)**_ _all the relevant circumstances, whether the proprietor had a_
_reasonable time to react to the intended repackaging._

(2002/C 144/08)
( [1] ) OJ C 233 of 12.8.2000.

_(Language of the case: English)_

In Case C-143/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales,
**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT**
Chancery Division (United Kingdom), for a preliminary ruling
in the proceedings pending before that court between Boehringer Ingelheim KG, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma KG and **(Fifth Chamber)**
Swingward Ltd, and between Boehringer Ingelheim KG, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma KG and Dowelhurst Ltd, and between
**25 April 2002**
Glaxo Group Ltd and Swingward Ltd, and between Boehringer
Ingelheim KG, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma KG and Dowelhurst Ltd, and between Glaxo Group Ltd, The Wellcome **in Case C-154/00: Commission of the European Communi-**
Foundation Ltd and Dowelhurst Ltd, and between SmithKline
**ties v Hellenic Republic** ( [1] )
Beecham plc, Beecham Group plc, SmithKline & French
Laboratories Ltd and Dowelhurst Ltd and between Eli Lilly and
Co. and Dowelhurst Ltd, on the interpretation of Article 7(2) _**(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —**_
of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 _**Directive 85/374/EEC — Product liability — Incorrect**_
to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade _**transposition)**_
marks (OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1), as amended by the Agreement on
the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992 (OJ 1994 L 1,
(2002/C 144/09)
p. 3), and of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC, the Court, composed
of: G. C. Rodrı´guez Iglesias, President, P. Jann (President
of Chamber), C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), D. A. O. Edward, _(Language of the case: Greek)_
M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen, V. Skouris, J. N. Cunha Rodrigues
and C. W. A. Timmermans, Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate
General; D. Louterman-Hubeau, Head of Division, for the _(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published_
Registrar,has given a judgment on 23 April 2002, in which it _in the European Court Reports)_
has ruled:

1. _Article 7(2) of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of_ In Case C-154/00, Commission of the European Communities
_21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member_ (Agent: M. Patakia) v Hellenic Republic (Agents: A. Samoni