CELEX: 62008CN0324
Language: en
Date: 2008-07-16 00:00:00
Title: Case C-324/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 16 July 2008 — 1. Makro Zelfbedieningsgroothandel CV, 2. Metro Cash & Carry BV and 3. Remo Zaandam BV v Diesel SpA

25.10.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 272/8
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 16 July 2008 — 1. Makro Zelfbedieningsgroothandel CV, 2. Metro Cash & Carry BV and 3. Remo Zaandam BV v Diesel SpA
   (Case C-324/08)
   (2008/C 272/10)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   Referring court
   Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Appellants: 1. Makro Zelfbedieningsgroothandel CV, 2. Metro Cash & Carry BV and 3. Remo Zaandam BV
   
      Respondent: Diesel SpA
   Questions referred
   
               1.
            
            
               In the case where goods bearing a trade mark proprietor's mark have previously been placed on the market within the EEA, but not by him or with his express consent, must the same criteria be applied in determining whether this has occurred with the (implicit) consent of the trade mark proprietor, within the meaning of Article 7(1) of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC (1) of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks, as are applied in the case where such goods have previously been placed on the market outside the EEA by the trade mark proprietor or with his consent?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               If the answer to Question 1 is in the negative, what criteria — whether or not derived (in part) from the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-9/93 IHT and Danzinger v Ideal-Standard and Wabco Standard [1994] ECR I-2789, … — must be applied in the first case referred to in that question in order to determine whether the trade mark proprietor has given (implicit) consent within the meaning of Directive 89/104/EEC?
            
         
      (1)  OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1.