CELEX: C1999/121/20
Language: en
Date: 1999-05-01 00:00:00
Title: Case C-60/99: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Supreme Court, Dublin, by order of that court of 15 July 1998, in the case of Carmen Proetta against Andrew Neil

1.5.1999              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 121/11
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Supreme Court,                Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Landgericht
Dublin, by order of that court of 15 July 1998, in the case             Mainz by order of that court of 22 January 1999 in the
           of Carmen Proetta against Andrew Neil                        case of Deutsche Post AG against Landal Green Parks
                                                                                                       GmbH
                         (Case C-60/99)                                                            (Case C-61/99)
                        (1999/C 121/20)                                                           (1999/C 121/21)
                                                                        Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  European Communities by order of the Landgericht Mainz
European Communities by an order of the Supreme Court,                  (Regional Court, Mainz) of 22 January 1999, received at the
Dublin, of 15 July 1998, which was received at the Court                Court Registry on 22 February 1999, for a preliminary ruling
Registry on 22 February 1999, for a preliminary ruling in the           in the case of Deutsche Post AG against Landal Green Parks
case of Carmen Proetta against Andrew Neil, on the following            GmbH on the following questions:
questions:
                                                                        1. Are Articles 59 et seq., 52 et seq. and 30 et seq. of the EC
1. Is the right of a citizen of the European Community to his               Treaty to be interpreted as allowing an undertaking within
    or her good name a fundamental right guaranteed by                      the European Union to conduct advertising centrally from
    Community law?                                                          the parent company in Member State A for a subsidiary in
                                                                            Member State B, where the parent company organises the
                                                                            advertising, pays for it and, using the postal administration
                                                                            of Member State A to despatch the advertising material,
2. Is an action for alleged libel taken by a national of one                sends it to the consumer being approached, so that the
    Member State against a national of a second Member State                exercise of the power of the postal administration of
    in the courts of a third Member State, where the alleged                Member state B to demand internal charges for the delivery
    libel was alleged to have been published, a matter within               of the letters — at any rate if the advertising mail, as
    the scope of application of the EC Treaty and, in particular,           indicated by its content and the fact that it refers almost
    of Article 6 thereof?                                                   entirely only to the subsidiary in Member State B, is sent
                                                                            on behalf of that subsidiary, which the advertising is also
                                                                            intended to benefit directly — amounts to a penalty or
3. Is the right of a national of a member State to sue a                    discrimination and thus infringes the freedom to provide
    national of another Member State in a third Member State                services, the free movement of goods (if the moveable
    for a tort, in this instance the tort of libel, pursuant to             property element of the service is predominant) and
    Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention, a Community law                freedom of establishment?
    right?
                                                                            Does that also hold true if the reason for that practice of
                                                                            the undertaking is solely or partly to make savings on
                                                                            postal charges inasmuch as the rates of charge in Member
4. Where a civil action is brought before the courts of a                   State A, in which the parent company has its registered
    member State pursuant to the provisions of the Brussels                 office and from where it conducts all the undertaking’s
    Convention, does Article 6 of the EC Treaty preclude the                advertising, are slightly or significantly lower than those of
    courts of that Member State from requiring a national of                Member State B, in which the subsidiary primarily intended
    another Member State resident outside the jurisdiction of               to benefit financially from the advertising operates?
    the courts of the Member State in question to lodge
    security for the costs of the proceedings when no such
    requirement could be imposed upon an individual resident            2. Is Article 90 (1) of the EC Treaty to be interpreted as
    within the jurisdiction of the said Member State?                       meaning that a law ratifying the Universal Postal Union
                                                                            Convention of 14 December 1989 infringes the prohib-
                                                                            ition of abuse in subparagraphs (a) and (c) of the second
5. Where a civil action, not otherwise connected with a                     paragraph of Article 86 of the EC Treaty, as a measure by
    Community law right, is brought the courts of a Member                  a Member state falling outside Article 90 (2) of that Treaty,
    State pursuant to the previsions of the Brussels Convention,            in so far as it confers on the postal administration of
    does Article 6 of the EC Treaty preclude the courts of that             Member State B the right to impose internal postal charges,
    Member State from requiring a national of another Member                giving credit for the postal charges already paid in Member
    State resident outside the jurisdiction of the courts of the            State A, in respect of the delivery of letter-post items which
    Member State in question to lodge security for the costs of             were posted in Member State A, when the originator of the
    the proceedings when no such requirement could be                       letters, intellectually and substantively, is an undertaking in
    imposed upon an individual resident within the jurisdiction             Member State A but their content and the overall
    of the said Member State.                                               impression of the advertising mail together indicate to the
                                                                            recipient that they are sent solely by the undertaking in
                                                                            Member State B which is being advertised?