CELEX: C1998/007/04
Language: en
Date: 1998-01-10 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT of 11 November 1997 in Case C-251/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof): Sabel BV v. Puma AG, Rudolf Dassler Sport (Directive 89/104/EEC - Approximation of laws relating to the trade marks - 'Likelihood of confusion which includes the likelihood of association')

C 7/2                  EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                     10. 1. 98
1. Article 37 of the EC Treaty does not preclude                     classified under heading 30 04 of the combined
     domestic provisions relating to the existence and               nomenclature, as established in the annex to Council
     operation of a national monopoly on the retail of               Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the
     alcoholic beverages such as those mentioned in the              tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common
     order for reference.                                            Customs Tariff, and consequently do not come within the
                                                                     scope of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1010/86 of
2. Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty preclude domestic             25 March 1986 laying down general rules for the
     provisions allowing only traders holding a production           production refund on certain sugar products used in the
     licence or a wholesale licence to import alcoholic              chemical industry.
     beverages on conditions such as those laid down by
     Swedish legislation.                                            (1) OJ C 233, 10. 8. 1996.
(1) OJ C 208, 12. 8. 1995.
                                                                                    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                         of 11 November 1997
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                     in Case C-251/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                       (Fourth Chamber)                              the Bundesgerichtshof): Sabel BV v. Puma AG, Rudolf
                     of 6 November 1997                                                     Dassler Sport (1)
in Case C-201/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from            (Directive 89/104/EEC Ð Approximation of laws relating
the Tribunal Administratif de Paris): Laboratoires de                to the trade marks Ð Likelihood of confusion which
TheÂrapeutique Moderne (LTM) v. Fonds d'Intervention et                          includes the likelihood of association')
       de ReÂgularisation du MarcheÂ du Sucre (FIRS) (1)                                       (98/C 7/04)
(Refund for use of sugar in the manufacture of certain
chemical products Ð Multivitamin products and products                              (Language of the case: German)
        containing amino acids Ð Tariff classification)
                          (98/C 7/03)                                  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
                                                                               published in the European Court Reports)
                (Language of the case: French)
                                                                     In Case C-251/95: reference to the Court under Article 177
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be       of the EC Treaty from the Bundesgerichtshof for a
          published in the European Court Reports)                   preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
                                                                     court between Sabel BV and Puma AG, Rudolf Dassler
In Case C-201/96: reference to the Court under Article 177           Sport on the interpretation of Article 4 (1) (b) of first
of the EC Treaty from the Tribunal Administratif de Paris            Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to
(Administrative Court, Paris), for a preliminary ruling in           approximate the laws of the Member States relating to
the proceedings pending before that court between                    trade marks (OJ L 40, 11. 2. 1989, p. 1) Ð the Court,
Laboratoires de TheÂrapeutique Moderne (LTM) and Fonds               composed of: G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, C.
d'Intervention et de ReÂgularisation du MarcheÂ du Sucre             Gulmann (Rapporteur), H. Ragnemalm and M. Wathelet,
(FIRS) Ð on the interpretation of Council Regulation                 Presidents of Chambers, G. F. Mancini, J. C. Moitinho de
(EEC) No 1010/86 of 25 March 1986 laying down                        Almeida, P. J. G. Kapteyn, J. L. Murray, D. A. O. Edward,
general rules for the production refund on certain sugar             J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch, P. Jann and L. Sevón, Judges;
products used in the chemical industry (OJ L 94, 9. 4.               F. G. Jacobs, Advocate-General; H. A. Rühl, Principal
1986, p. 9), as amended by Article 9 of Commission                   Administrator, for the Registrar Ð has given a judgment
Regulation (EEC) No 1714/88 of 13 June 1988 (OJ L 152,               on 11 November 1997, in which it has ruled:
18. 6. 1988, p. 23), and of Chapters 21 and 30 of the
combined nomenclature, as established by Council                     The criterion of likelihood of confusion which includes
Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the                   the likelihood of association with the earlier mark'
tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common                contained in Article 4 (1) (b) of First Council Directive
Customs Tariff (OJ L 256, 7. 9. 1987, p. 1) Ð the Court              89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the
(Fourth Chamber), composed of: H. Ragnemalm,                         laws of the Member States relating to trade marks is to be
President of the Chamber, P. J. G. Kapteyn and J. L.                 interpreted as meaning that the mere association which
Murray (Rapporteur), Judges: M. B. Elmer, Advocate-                  the public might make between two trade marks as a
General; H. A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the                result of their analogous semantic content is not in itself a
Registrar, has given a judgment on 6 November 1997, in               sufficient ground for concluding that there is a likelihood
which it has ruled:                                                  of confusion within the meaning of that provision.
Products consisting of ingredients identical to those                (1) OJ C 248, 23. 9. 1995.
contained in Alvityl 50 DrageÂes' and Strongenol 20
Ampoules' and in the same proportions cannot be