CELEX: C2003/019/04
Language: en
Date: 2003-01-25 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 12 December 2002 in Case C-273/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespatentgericht): Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (Trade marks — Approximation of laws — Directive 89/104/EEC — Article 2 — Signs of which a trade mark may consist — Signs capable of being represented graphically — Olfactory signs)

25.1.2003                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                             C 19/3
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                        JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                       of 12 December 2002                                                              (Sixth Chamber)
in Case C-273/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from                                            of 5 December 2002
the Bundespatentgericht): Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches
                    Patent- und Markenamt (1)
                                                                              in Case C-379/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling
                                                                              from the VAT and Duties Tribunal, London): Overland
(Trade marks — Approximation of laws — Directive 89/                           Footwear Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise (1)
104/EEC — Article 2 — Signs of which a trade mark may
consist — Signs capable of being represented graphically —
                            Olfactory signs)                                  (Customs Code — Customs value of imported goods — Price
                                                                              of goods and buying commission — Reimbursement of duty
                                                                                                   payable on full amount)
                            (2003/C 19/04)
                                                                                                         (2003/C 19/05)
                    (Language of the case: German)
                                                                                                 (Language of the case: English)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)
                                                                              In Case C-379/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
                                                                              EC by the VAT and Duties Tribunal, London (United Kingdom),
In Case C-273/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234                    for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
EC by the Bundespatentgericht (Germany) for a preliminary                     court between Overland Footwear Ltd and Commissioners of
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between                   Customs and Excise, on the interpretation of Articles 29, 32,
Ralf Sieckmann and Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt, on the                    33, 78 and 236 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of
interpretation of Article 2 of First Council Directive 89/104/                12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code
EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the                        (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1), the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed
Member States relating to trade marks (OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1),                   of: J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen,
the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President,                   C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodri-
M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen, C.W.A. Timmermans (Presidents of                   gues, Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal
Chambers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola,                          Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
V. Skouris, F. Macken (Rapporteur), N. Colneric and J.N. Cunha                5 December 2002, in which it has ruled:
Rodrigues, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General;
D. Louterman-Hubeau, Head of Division, for the Registrar, has
given a judgment on 12 December 2002, in which it has ruled:                  1.    Articles 29, 32 and 33 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/
                                                                                    92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs
                                                                                    Code must be construed as meaning that a buying commission
(1) Article 2 of Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December                        which is included in the customs value declared and is not
      1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating                    shown separately from the selling price of the goods in the
      to trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that a trade                    import declaration must be considered to be part of the
      mark may consist of a sign which is not in itself capable of                  transaction value within the meaning of Article 29 of that
      being perceived visually, provided that it can be represented                 regulation and is, therefore, dutiable.
      graphically, particularly by means of images, lines or characters,
      and that the representation is clear, precise, self-contained,
                                                                              2.    In a situation where the customs authorities have agreed to
      easily accessible, intelligible, durable and objective.
                                                                                    undertake revision of an import declaration and have adopted a
                                                                                    decision ‘regularising the situation’ within the meaning of
(2) In respect of an olfactory sign, the requirements of graphic                    Article 78(3) of Regulation No 2913/92 taking account of
      representability are not satisfied by a chemical formula, by a                the fact that the declaration was incomplete as a result of an
      description in written words, by the deposit of an odour sample               inadvertent error by the declarant, those authorities may not go
      or by a combination of those elements.                                        back on that decision.
( 1) OJ C 259 of 9.9.2000.                                                    (1 ) OJ C 355 of 9.12.2000.