CELEX: C1998/258/16
Language: en
Date: 1998-08-15 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT of 16 June 1998 in Case C-162/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof): A. Racke GmbH & Co. v Hauptzollamt Mainz (EEC/Yugoslavia Cooperation Agreement - Suspension of trade concessions - Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - Rebus sic stantibus clause)

15.8.98              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 258/9
              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                 Ð although the parties remain free to initiate proceedings
                                                                         on the merits of the case, the decision is usually
                      of 16 June 1998
                                                                         accepted by the parties as a final' resolution of their
in Case C-53/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                 dispute,
the Arrondissementsrechtbank te Amsterdam): HermeÁs
       International v FHT Marketing Choice BV (1)
                                                                    is to be regarded as a provisional measure' within the
(Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation Ð              meaning of Article 50 of the Agreement on Trade-Related
TRIPS Agreement Ð Article 177 of the Treaty Ð                       Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, as set out in
Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice Ð Article 50 of the            Annex 1 C to the Agreement establishing the World Trade
        TRIPS Agreement Ð Provisional measures)                     Organisation, approved on behalf of the Community, as
                                                                    regards matters within its competence, in Council
                       (98/C 258/15)
                                                                    Decision 94/800/EC of 22 December 1994.
               (Language of the case: Dutch)                        (1) OJ C 95 of 30.3.1996.
 (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
         published in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
In Case C-53/96: reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty by the Arrondissementsrechtbank te                                        of 16 June 1998
Amsterdam for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings               in Case C-162/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
pending before that court between HermeÁs International             the Bundesfinanzhof): A. Racke GmbH & Co. v
(a partnership limited by shares) and FHT Marketing                                    Hauptzollamt Mainz (1)
Choice BV on the interpretation of Article 50(6) of the
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual                  (EEC/Yugoslavia Cooperation Agreement Ð Suspension
Property Rights, as set out in Annex 1 C to the Agreement           of trade concessions Ð Vienna Convention on the Law of
establishing the World Trade Organisation, approved on                         Treaties Ð Rebus sic stantibus clause)
behalf of the Community, as regards matters within its
                                                                                            (98/C 258/16)
competence, in Council Decision 94/800/EC of
22 December 1994 (OJ L 336 of 23.12.1994, p. 1) Ð the
Court, composed of: G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President,                           (Language of the case: German)
C. Gulmann, H. Ragnemalm, M. Wathelet, Presidents of
Chambers, G. F. Mancini, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida,
P. J. G. Kapteyn, J. L. Murray, D. A. O. Edward
                                                                      (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
(Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch and P. Jann, L.
                                                                             published in the European Court Reports)
Sevón, Judges; Advocate General: G. Tesauro, Registrar:
L. Hewlett, Administrator, has given a judgment on
16 June 1998, in which it has ruled:                                In Case C-162/96: reference to the Court under Article 177
                                                                    of the EC Treaty by the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) for a
                                                                    preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
A measure whose purpose is to put an end to alleged                 court between A. Racke GmbH & Co. and Hauptzollamt
infringements of a trade-mark right and which is adopted            Mainz Ð on the validity of Council Regulation (EEC)
in the course of a procedure distinguished by the following         No 3300/91 of 11 November 1991 suspending the trade
features:                                                           concessions provided for by the Cooperation Agreement
                                                                    between the European Economic Community and the
                                                                    Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (OJ L 315 of
Ð the measure is characterised under national law as an             15.11.1991, p. 1) Ð the Court composed of: G. C.
    immediate provisonal measure' and its adoption must            Rodríguez Iglesias, President, C. Gulmann, H. Ragnemalm
    be required on grounds of urgency',                            and M. Wathelet, Presidents of the Chambers, J. C.
                                                                    Moitinho de Almeida, P. J. G. Kapteyn (Rapporteur), J. L.
                                                                    Murray, D. A. O. Edward, G. Hirsch, P. Jann and L.
Ð the opposing party is summoned and is heard if he                 Sevón, Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate General; D.
    appears before the court,                                       Louterman-Hubeau, Principal Administrator, for the
                                                                    Registrar, has given a judgment on 16 June 1998, in which
                                                                    it has ruled:
Ð the decision adopting the measure is reasoned and
    given in writing following an assessment of the
    substance of the case by the judge hearing the interim          Examination of the questions referred has disclosed no
    application,                                                    factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Council
                                                                    Regulation (EEC) No 3300/91 of 11 November 1991
                                                                    suspending the trade concessions provided for by the
Ð an appeal may lodged against the decision, and                    Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic
 ---pagebreak--- C 258/10              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                    15.8.98
Community       and   the   Socialist  Federal   Republic    of                    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Yugoslavia.
                                                                                            (Sixth Chamber)
( ) OJ C 197 of 6.7.1996.
 1
                                                                                            of 17 June 1998
                                                                     in Case C-243/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                     the Labour Court): Kathleen Hill and Ann Stapleton v the
                                                                        Revenue Commissioners and Department of Finance (1)
                                                                     (Equal treatment of men and women Ð National civil
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                 servants Ð Job-sharing scheme Ð Incremental credit
                       of 16 June 1998                               determined on the basis of the criterion of actual time
                                                                                  worked Ð Indirect discrimination)
in Case C-226/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Arrondissementsrechtbank te Maastricht): criminal                                        (98/C 258/18)
    proceedings against Johannes Martinus Lemmens (1)
(Directive 83/189/EEC Ð Procedure for the provision of
information in the field of technical standards and
        regulations Ð Direct effect of the Directive)                               (Language of the case: English)
                        (98/C 258/17)
                (Language of the case: Dutch)                        In Case C-243/95: reference to the Court under Article 177
                                                                     of the EC Treaty by the Labour Court (Ireland) for a
                                                                     preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be       tribunal between Kathleen Hill and Ann Stapleton and the
          published in the European Court Reports)                   Revenue Commissioners, Department of Finance Ð on the
                                                                     interpretation of Council Directive 75/117/EEC of
                                                                     10 February 1975 on the approximation of the laws of the
In Case C-226/97: reference to the Court under Article 177           Member States relating to the application of the principle
of the EC Treaty from the Arrondissementsrechtbank                   of equal pay for men and women (OJ L 45 of 19.2.1975,
(District Court) Maastricht (Netherlands) for a                      p. 19) Ð the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: H.
preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings before that           Ragnemalm, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, G. F.
Court against Johannes Martinus Lemmens Ð on the                     Mancini, J. L. Murray (Rapporteur) and G. Hirsch,
interpretation of Council Directive 83/189/EEC of                    Judges; A. La Pergola, Advocate General; L. Hewlett,
28 March 1983 laying down a procedure for the provision              Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
of information in the field of technical standards and               17 June 1998, in which it has ruled:
regulations (OJ L 109 of 26.4.1983, p. 8) Ð the Court,
composed of: C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), President of the
Third and Fifth Chambers, acting for the President, G. F.
Mancini, P. J. G. Kapteyn, J. L. Murray, D. A. O. Edward,
                                                                     Article 119 of the EC Treaty and Council Directive 75/
J.-P. Puissochet, P. Jann and L. Sevón, Judges; N. Fennelly,
                                                                     117/EEC of 10 February 1975 on the approximation of
Advocate General; D. Louterman-Hubeau, Principal
                                                                     the laws of the Member States relating to the application
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
                                                                     of the principle of equal pay for men and women are to
16 June 1998, in which it has ruled:
                                                                     be interpreted as precluding legislation which provides
                                                                     that, where a much higher percentage of female workers
                                                                     than male workers are engaged in job-sharing, job-sharers
Council Directive 83/189/EEC of 28 March 1983 laying
                                                                     who convert to full-time employment are given a point on
down a procedure for the provision of information in the
                                                                     the pay scale applicable to full-time staff which is lower
field of technical standards and regulations is to be
                                                                     than that which those workers previously occupied on the
interpreted as meaning that breach of the obligation
                                                                     pay scale applicable to job-sharing staff due to the fact
imposed by Article 8 thereof to notify a technical
                                                                     that the employer has applied the criterion of service
regulation on breath-analysis apparatus does not have the
                                                                     calculated by the actual length of time worked in a post,
effect of making it impossible for evidence obtained by
                                                                     unless such legislation can be justified by objective criteria
means of such apparatus, authorised in accordance with
                                                                     unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex.
regulations which have not been notified, to be relied
upon against an individual charged with driving while
under the influence of alcohol.
                                                                     (1) OJ C 229 of 2.9.1995.
(1) OJ C 228 of 26.7.1997.