CELEX: C2001/200/25
Language: en
Date: 2001-07-14 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 May 2001 in Case C-258/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arrondissementsrechtbank 's-Gravenhage): BASF AG v Bureau voor de Industriële Eigendom (BIE) [Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 — Plant protection products — Supplementary protection certificate]

C 200/14                  EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                          14.7.2001
(Italy) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending                   ’s-Gravenhage (District Court, The Hague) (Netherlands) for a
before that court between Agorà Srl and Ente Autonomo Fiera                   preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
Internazionale di Milano, and between Excelsior Snc di Pedrotti               court between BASF AG and Bureau voor de Industriële
Bruna & C. and Ente Autonomo Fiera Internazionale di Milano,                  Eigendom (BIE) — on the interpretation of Articles 1 and 3 of
Ciftat soc. coop. arl — on the interpretation of Article 1(b) of              Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 of the European Parliament and
Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the                   of the Council of 23 July 1996 concerning the creation of
coordination of procedures for the award of public service                    a supplementary protection certificate for plant protection
contracts (OJ 1992 L 209, p. 1) — the Court (Fifth Chamber),                  products (OJ 1996 L 198, p. 30) — the Court (Sixth Chamber),
composed of: A. La Pergola, President of the Chamber,                         composed of: C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), President of the
M. Wathelet, D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann (Rapporteur) and                          Chamber, V. Skouris, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen and
L. Sevón, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl,                     F. Macken, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; D. Louter-
Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment              man-Hubeau, Head of Division, for the Registrar, has given a
on 10 May 2001, in which it has ruled:                                        judgment on 10 May 2001, in which it has ruled:
A body
—     whose object is to carry on activities relating to the organisation     1.   The concept of a product within the meaning of Article 3 of
      of fairs, exhibitions and other similar initiatives;                         Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 of the European Parliament and
                                                                                   of the Council of 23 July 1996 concerning the creation of a
—     which is non-profit-making but is administered according to                  supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products
      the criteria of performance, efficiency and cost-effectiveness; and          covers chemical elements and their compounds, as they occur
                                                                                   naturally or by manufacture, including any impurity inevitably
—     which operates in a competitive environment
                                                                                   resulting from the manufacturing process, which have general
does not constitute a body governed by public law for the purposes of              or specific action against harmful organisms or on plants, parts
the second subparagraph of Article 1(b) of Council Directive                       of plants or plant products.
92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of
procedures for the award of public service contracts.
                                                                              2.   Two products which differ only in the proportion of the active
                                                                                   chemical compound to the impurity they contain, one having a
(1) OJ C 246 of 28.9.1999.                                                         greater percentage of the impurity than the other, must be
                                                                                   regarded as the same product within the meaning of Article 3
                                                                                   of Regulation No 1610/96.
                                                                              3.   The fact that a marketing authorisation must be obtained for
                                                                                   the new plant protection product which has a different
                                                                                   proportion of active chemical compound to impurity from that
                                                                                   of the former plant protection product is not relevant for the
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                           purposes of establishing whether or not the constituent products
                                                                                   of those plant protection products are the same.
                           (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                              4.   The conditions laid down in Article 3(1)(a) and (d) of
                            of 10 May 2001                                         Regulation No 1610/96 are, in any event, not all satisfied
                                                                                   where a product, as a plant protection product, manufactured
in Case C-258/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                          according to a patented process and the subject of a marketing
the Arrondissementsrechtbank ’s-Gravenhage): BASF AG                               authorisation, differs from a previously authorised product, as a
       v Bureau voor de Industriële Eigendom (BIE) (1)                             plant protection product, only in the proportion of the active
                                                                                   chemical compound to the impurity it contains, the percentage
                                                                                   of impurity being greater in the older product than in the new
[Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 — Plant protection products                            one, and where that process patent has been designated as the
             — Supplementary protection certificate]                               basic patent.
                            (2001/C 200/25)
                      (Language of the case: Dutch)                           (1) OJ C 265 of 18.9.1999.
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                     in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-258/99: reference to the Court under Article 234
of the EC Treaty from the Arrondissementsrechtbank