CELEX: C1995/351/07
Language: en
Date: 1995-12-30 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden by judgment of that court of 20 October 1995 in the Case of 1. Parfums Christian Dior SA, 2. Parfums Christian Dior BV v. Evora BV (Case C-337/95)

30 . 12 . 95             EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      No C 351 /3
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du Travail,              Garanti'a Salarial on the basis that the full length of service is
Liege ( Second Chamber ) by judgment of that court of                     not taken into account but that some of the periods of
10 October 1995             in the case of Institut National              employment are excluded, notwithstanding the fact that
d'Assurances Sociales pour Travailleurs Independants                      work was performed uninterruptedly for an undertaking
                     (Inasti ) v. Michel Picard                           which was transferred, without infringing Article 1(1 ) and
                          ( Case C-335 /95 )                              the second subparagraph of Article 3 ( 3 ) of Council
                                                                          Directive 77/ 187/EEC ?
                             ( 95/C 351 /05 )
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by a judgment of the Cour du
Travail ( Higher Labour Court), Liege ( Second Chamber ) of
10 October 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry
on 23 October 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of              Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der
Institut National d'Assurances Sociales pour Travailleurs                 Nederlanden by judgment of that court of 20 October 1995
Independants ( Inasti ) v. Michel Picard on the following                 in the Case of 1 . Parfums Christian Dior SA, 2 . Parfums
questions :                                                                                Christian Dior BV v. Evora BY
                                                                                                   ( Case C-337/95 )
1 . Does Article 36 ( 4 ) of Council Regulation ( EEC )                                              ( 95/C 351 /07 )
     No 574/72 (') laying down the procedure for
     implementing Regulation ( EEC ) No 1408/71 on the
     application of social security schemes to employed                   Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
     persons, to self-employed persons and to members of                  European Communities by a judgment of the Hoge Raad
     their families moving within the Community lay down a                der Nederlanden ( Supreme Court of the Netherlands ) of
     general independent rule which applies irrespective of               20 October 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry
     compliance with the provisions of Article 36 (1 ), ( 2 ) and         on 26 October 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of
     ( 3 )?
                                                                          1 . Parfums Christian Dior SA, established in Paris,
                                                                          2 . Parfums Christian Dior BV, established at Rotterdam, v.
                                                                          Evora BV on the following questions :
2 . If the reply to the first question is in the negative , must an
     employed or a self-employed person who cannot,
     without prior recognition of entitlement to a pension by             ( a ) where, in proceedings relating to trade marks in one of
                                                                                 the    Benelux   countries    in   connection     with    the
     the competent institution of another Member State ( in
     the present case , the Member State of which he is a                        interpretation of the Uniform Benelux Law on Trade
     national ), obtain the recognition of entitlement to a                      Marks, a question relating to the interpretation of the
     pension by the competent institution of his State of                        First Council Directive 89/ 104/EEC ( ] ) of 21 December
     residence , nevertheless submit a claim in the State of                     1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States
     residence    in    order      for  benefits  to   be  awarded               relating to trade marks arises, is the highest national
     concurrently in both States ?                                               court or the Benelux Court to be regarded as the court
                                                                                 or tribunal of the Member State against whose
                                                                                 decisions there is no remedy under national law and
(') O J No L 74 , p . 1 .
                                                                                 which is therefore obliged under the third paragraph of
                                                                                 Article 1 77 of the EC Treaty to make a reference to the
                                                                                 Court of Justice ?
                                                                           ( b ) Is it in keeping with the system of the aforementioned
                                                                                 Directive , in particular Articles 5 , 6 and 7 thereof, to
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Juzgado de lo                          assume that, where it is a question of the resale of goods
Social No 16 by order of that court of 1 September 1995 in                       which have been put on the market in the Community
the case of Pedro Burdalo and Others against Fondo de                            under a trade mark by the trade mark proprietor or
                           Garantia Salarial
                                                                                 with his consent, the reseller is also free to use that trade
                             Case C-336/95 )                                     mark for the purposes of bringing such further
                              ( 95/C 351 /06 )                                   commercialization to the attention of the public ?
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                     (c ) In the event that question ( b ) is answered in the
 European Communities by order of the Juzgado de lo Social                       affirmative, do exceptions exist to that rule ?
 ( Social Court ) No 16 of 1 September 1995 , which was
 received at the Court Registry on 26 October 1995 , for a                 ( d ) In the event that question ( c ) is answered in the
 preliminary ruling in the case of Pedro Burdalo and Others                      affirmative, is there room for an exception where the
 against Fondo de Garanti'a Salarial on the following                             advertising function of the trade mark is endangered by
 question :                                                                      the fact that, as a result of the manner in which the
                                                                                  reseller uses the trade mark in order to attract public
 may the legislation or the case-law of a Member State reduce                     attention in that way, he damages the luxurious and
 the benefits which must be awarded by the Fondo de                               prestigious image of the trade mark ?
 ---pagebreak--- No C 351 /4                EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                        30 . 12 . 95
( e ) Can there said to be 'legitimate reasons' within the                       carrying the goods on the ocean leg — also to carry the
       meaning of Article 7 ( 2 ) of the Directive where , as a                  goods from the shipper's premises in western Europe to
       result of the way in which the reseller advertises the                    the port of shipment in western Europe ('inland
       goods, the 'mental condition ' of the goods — that is to                  haulage '), and
        say, their allure, prestigious image and aura of luxury
        resulting from the manner in which the trade mark                 — the lines conclude an agreement between themselves
        proprietor has chosen to present and advertise the                       pursuant to which they undertake to adhere to an agreed
        goods using his trade mark rights — is altered or                        tariff and pricing policy for such multi-modal services,
        detracted from ?                                                         and
( f) Do the provisions of Articles 30 and 36 of the EC                    — the agreed tariff and pricing policy covers all the
        Treaty preclude the proprietor of a (picture ) trade mark                elements of the charges made for multi-modal services
        or a holder of copyright relating to the bottles and                     offered by the lines , including not only the ocean leg but
        packaging used for his goods from making it                              also the inland haulage and other ancillary charges
        impossible, by invoking the trade mark right or                          relating to such services ( such as stevedoring, stuffing of
        copyright, for a reseller who is free further to                         containers , demurrage and detention ),
        commercialize those goods to advertise the goods in a
        manner customary to retail traders in the relevant                is that agreement subject to the provisions of Council
        sector ? Is this the case also where the reseller , as a result
        of the manner in which he uses the trade mark in his
                                                                          Regulation ( EEC ) No 4056/86 of 22, December 1986 laying
                                                                          down detailed rules for the application of Articles 85 and 86
        advertising material, damages the luxurious and                   of the Treaty to maritime transport ( 1 ), and in particular
        prestigious image of the trade mark or the publication            Article 3 , alone, or is it also subject to the provisions of
        or reproduction take place in circumstances such that             Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 1017/68 of 19 July 1968
        damage may be done to the person entitled to the                  applying rules of competition to transport by rail, road and
        copyright ?                                                       inland waterway ( 2 ) ( in so far as it concerns inland haulage )
                                                                          and/or Council Regulation No 17 : First Regulation
 (') OJ No L 40 , p . 1 .                                                 implementing Articles 85 and 86 ( 3 ) of the Treaty ( in so far
                                                                          as it concerns other ancillary services ) ? In the latter event, to
                                                                          what aspects of the agreement do the different Regulations
                                                                          respectively apply ?
                                                                          Question 2 — ' Common or uniform rates '
 Reference for a preliminary ruling by the High Court of
Justice, Queen's Bench Division , Commercial Court, by
 order of that court of 18 January 1995 , in the case of                  2.1 .       In determining whether a group of two or more
 Compagnia di Navigazione Marittima and others against                    vesselroperating carriers constitutes a ' liner conference '
              Compagnie Maritime Beige and others                         within the meaning of Article 1 ( 3 ) ( b ) of Council Regulation
                                                                           ( EEC ) No 4056/86 , and in particular whether the carriers
                            ( Case C-339/95 )
                                                                          are parties to an agreement or arrangement, of whatever
                              ( 95/C 351 /08 )                            nature, within the framework of which they operate ( or
                                                                          purport to operate ) under 'common or uniform freight
 Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                    rates ':
 European Communities by an order of the High Court of
 Justice, Queen's Bench Division , Commercial Court, of                    ( a ) does the expression ' freight rates ' refer, in the case of
  1 8 January 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry                      multi-modal services, only to the component to be
 on 30 October 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of                      charged for the ocean leg of the service ( where this can
 Compagnia di Navigazione Marittima and others against                             be separately ascertained ) or does it refer to the total
 Compagnie Maritime Beige and others, on the following                             charge to be made for such a service ?
 questions :
                                                                            ( b ) If the agreed tariff or pricing policy involves a single
                                                                                   freight rate for a particular multi-modal service ( i.e.
  Question 1 — Applicable Regulation(s)                                            where the freight rate is not comprised of distinct
                                                                                   components for the ocean leg and inland haulage ), how
  1.1      Where :                                                                 is the test of ' common or uniform trade ' to be
                                                                                   applied ?
 — a number of shipping lines provide regular international
       liner services for the carriage of goods in containers by            2.2 . What is meant by the words 'common or uniform' in
       sea from various ports in western Europe to ports in the             Article 1 ( 3 ) ( b )? In particular, does the notion of 'common
       Arabian Gulf, and                                                    or uniform' cover the case where rates are not uniform ( in
                                                                            the sense that not all shippers of the same cargo are charged
  — the services offered by the lines include door-to-door                  the same rate ) but are nonetheless agreed in common ( in the
       ('multi-modal ') carriage whereby, pursuant to a single              sense that there exists elaborate procedures for reporting,
       contract of carriage between the shipper and the                     monitoring and securing agreement to special rates
       shipping line, the line undertakes — in addition to                   negotiated for or by shippers or groups of shippers, which