CELEX: C2002/323/24
Language: en
Date: 2002-12-21 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 24 October 2002 in Case C-81/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation): Borie Manoux SARL v Directeur de l'Institut national de la propriété industrielle (INPI) (Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Wine — Description and presentation of wines — Quality wines produced in specific regions — Brand name printed on label — Restrictions — Articles 11 and 40 of Regulation No 2392/89)

21.12.2002               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                           C 323/19
and J.N. Cuhna Rodrigues, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,                   Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), President
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment                 of the Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. La Pergola, P. Jann
on 24 October 2002, in which it:                                            and S. von Bahr, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass,
                                                                            Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 November 2002, in
                                                                            which it:
1.    Declares that, by failing to specify the circumstances in which
      the workers concerned are to be provided with special corrective
      appliances appropriate for the work concerned, the Italian            1.    Dismisses the appeals;
      Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 9(3)
      of Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the                 2.    Orders Glencore Grain Ltd to pay the costs in Case C-24/01 P
      minimum safety and health requirements for work with display                and Compagnie Continentale (France) SA to pay the costs in
      screen equipment (fifth individual Directive within the meaning             Case C-25/01 P.
      of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC);
2.    Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.                         (1 ) OJ C 108 of 7.4.2001.
( 1) OJ C 79 of 10.3.2001.
                                                                                             JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                    (Second Chamber)
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                   of 24 October 2002
                           (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                            in Case C-81/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
                        of 7 November 2002                                  the Cour de cassation): Borie Manoux SARL v Directeur
                                                                             de l’Institut national de la propriété industrielle (INPI) (1)
In Joined Cases C-24/01 P and C-25/01 P: Glencore Grain
       Ltd and Compagnie Continentale (France) SA (1)                       (Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets —
                                                                            Wine — Description and presentation of wines — Quality
                                                                            wines produced in specific regions — Brand name printed on
(Appeal — Emergency aid provided by the Community to                        label — Restrictions — Articles 11 and 40 of Regulation
the States of the former Soviet Union — Invitation to tender                                            No 2392/89)
          — Free competition — Hearing of witnesses)
                                                                                                      (2002/C 323/24)
                           (2002/C 323/23)
                                                                                                (Language of the case: French)
                     (Language of the case: French)
                                                                            (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published                         in the European Court Reports)
                    in the European Court Reports)
                                                                            In Case C-81/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
In Joined Cases C-24/01 P and C-25/01 P, Glencore Grain Ltd,                by the Cour de cassation (France) for a preliminary ruling in
formerly Richco Commodities Ltd, established in Hamilton                    the proceedings pending before that court between Borie
(Bermudes) (Agents: P. Bos and J. van Zuuren), Compagnie                    Manoux SARL and Directeur de l’Institut national de la
Continentale (France) SA, established in Labège (France)                    propriété industrielle (INPI), on the interpretation of Article 40
(Agents: P. Bos and P. Chabrier): Two Appeals against the                   of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2392/89 of 24 July 1989
judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European                     laying down general rules for the description and presentation
Communities (Second Chamber) of 8 November 2000 in                          of wines and grape musts (OJ 1989 L 232, p. 13), as amended
Joined Cases T-485/93, T-491/93, T-494/93 and T-61/98                       by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3897/91 of 16 December
Dreyfus and Others v Commission [2000] ECR II-3659,                         1991 (OJ 1991 L 368, p. 5), the Court (Second Chamber),
seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other parties                  composed of: R. Schintgen, President of the Chamber, V. Skou-
to the proceedings being: Commission of the European                        ris and N. Colneric (Rapporteur), Judges; L.A. Geelhoed,
Communities (Agents: M.-J. Jonczy and T. van Rijn), Louis                   Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
Dreyfus & Cie SA, established in Paris (France), the Court (Fifth           on 24 October 2002, in which it has ruled:
 ---pagebreak--- C 323/20                 EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                        21.12.2002
Article 40 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2392/89 of 24 July                1.    Dismisses the appeal;
1989 laying down general rules for the description and presentation
of wines and grape musts, as amended by Council Regulation (EEC)            2.    Orders Aéroports de Paris to pay the costs.
No 3897/91 of 16 December 1991, is to be interpreted as not
prohibiting the use of a trade mark which contains a geographical           (1 ) OJ C 118 of 21.4.2001.
reference and is intended for use in connection with the sale of wine
and is likely to give the false impression that the geographical
reference is protected, unless there is a real risk that use of such a
mark will mislead consumers and, as a result, alter their economic
behaviour. It is a matter for the national court to determine whether
or not that is the case.                                                                      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                      (Sixth Chamber)
( 1) OJ C 108 of 7.4.2001.
                                                                                                    of 24 October 2002
                                                                            in Case C-99/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                            the Verwaltungsgerichtshof): Gottfried Linhart v Hans
                                                                                                           Biffl ( 1)
                                                                            (Approximation of laws — Articles 30 and 36 of the EC
                                                                            Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 28 EC and 30 EC)
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                            — Directive 76/768/EEC relating to cosmetic products —
                                                                            Directive 84/450/EEC concerning misleading advertising —
                          (Sixth Chamber)                                   National legislation laying down restrictions on advertising)
                                                                                                       (2002/C 323/26)
                         of 24 October 2002
                                                                                                (Language of the case: German)
in Case C-82/01 P: Aéroports de Paris v Commission of
                                                                            (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                  the European Communities (1)
                                                                                                in the European Court Reports)
(Appeal — Competition — Air transport — Airport man-
agement — Abuse of dominant position — Discriminatory                       In Case C-99/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
                                 fees)                                      by the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) for a preliminary
                                                                            ruling in the proceedings pending before that court against
                                                                            Gottfried Linhart and Hans Biffl, on the interpretation of
                           (2002/C 323/25)                                  Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
                                                                            Articles 28 EC and 30 EC) and Council Directive 76/768/EEC
                                                                            of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the
                     (Language of the case: French)                         Member States relating to cosmetic products (OJ 1976 L 262,
                                                                            p. 169), as amended by Council Directive 93/35/EEC of
                                                                            14 June 1993 (OJ 1993 L 151, p. 32), and Council Directive
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                            84/450/EEC of 10 September 1984 relating to the approxi-
                    in the European Court Reports)
                                                                            mation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
                                                                            of the Member States concerning misleading advertising (OJ
                                                                            1984 L 250, p. 17), the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:
                                                                            J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen,
In Case C-82/01 P, Aéroports de Paris (Agent: H. Calvet):                   V. Skouris, F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur),
Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of               Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,
the European Communities (Third Chamber) of 12 December                     has given a judgment on 24 October 2002, in which it has
2000 in Case T-128/98 Aéroports de Paris v Commission                       ruled:
[2000] ECR II-3929, seeking to have that judgment set aside,
the other parties to the proceedings being: Commission of the               1.    Article 6(3) of Council Directive 76/768/EEC of 27 July
European Communities (Agent: L. Pignataro, assisted by                            1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States
B. Geneste) and Alpha Flight Services SAS (Agents: L. Marville                    relating to cosmetic products, as amended by Council Directive
and A. Denants), the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:                          93/35/EEC of 14 June 1993, precludes national legislation
C. Gulmann, acting for the President of the Sixth Chamber,                        which prohibits reference to expert medical opinions in the
V. Skouris, F. Macken, N. Colneric and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues                       marketing of cosmetic products — in particular, the use of the
(Rapporteur), Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General; R. Grass,                      statement ‘dermatologically tested’ — if that reference does not
Registrar, has given a judgment on 24 October 2002, in which                      include information relating to the contents and outcome of
it:                                                                               those assessments.