CELEX: 62008CN0059
Language: en
Date: 2008-02-15 00:00:00
Title: Case C-59/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de Cassation (France) lodged on 15 February 2008 — Copad SA v 1. Christian Dior couture SA, 2. Vincent Gladel, acting as receiver of Société industrielle de lingerie (SIL), 3. Société industrielle de lingerie (SIL)

12.4.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 92/20
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de Cassation (France) lodged on 15 February 2008 — Copad SA v 1. Christian Dior couture SA, 2. Vincent Gladel, acting as receiver of Société industrielle de lingerie (SIL), 3. Société industrielle de lingerie (SIL)
   (Case C-59/08)
   (2008/C 92/37)
   Language of the case: French
   Referring court
   Cour de Cassation (France)
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Claimant: Copad SA
   
      Defendants: 1. Christian Dior couture SA, 2. Vincent Gladel, acting as receiver of Société industrielle de lingerie (SIL), 3. Société industrielle de lingerie (SIL)
   Questions referred
   
               1.
            
            
               Must Article 8(2) of First Council Directive No 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (1) be interpreted as meaning that the proprietor of a trade mark can invoke the rights conferred by that trade mark against a licensee who contravenes a provision in the licensing contract prohibiting, on grounds of the trade mark's prestige, sale to discount stores?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Must Article 7(1) of that directive be interpreted as meaning that a licensee who puts goods bearing a trade mark on the market in the European Economic Area in disregard of a provision of the licensing contract prohibiting, on grounds of the trade mark's prestige, sale to discount stores, does so without the consent of the trade mark proprietor?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               If not, can the proprietor invoke such a provision to oppose further commercialisation of the goods, on the basis of Article 7(2) of that directive?
            
         
      (1)  OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1.