CELEX: C2000/259/15
Language: en
Date: 2000-09-09 00:00:00
Title: Case C-273/00: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespatentgericht, by order of that court of 14 April 2000 in the appeal proceedings brought by Dr Ralf Sieckmann

9.9.2000               EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 259/9
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespa-                   Must the second paragraph of Article 288 EC (formerly the
tentgericht, by order of that court of 14 April 2000 in the             second paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty) be interpret-
    appeal proceedings brought by Dr Ralf Sieckmann                     ed as meaning that, where an application is made for an order
                                                                        requiring the Commission of the European Communities to
                         (Case C-273/00)                                participate in an expert assessment which has already been
                                                                        ordered as against the Belgian State, on the basis that the
                         (2000/C 259/15)                                assessment procedure and the expert’s final report are to be
                                                                        declared common to the parties and binding on the Com-
                                                                        mission of the European Communities; and the expert’s tasks
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  in that connection include inter alia an examination of the
European Communities by order of the Bundespatentgericht                responses and behaviour of the Commission of the European
(Federal Patents Court) of 14 April 2000, received at the Court         Communities, its bodies and employees from the time it
Registry on 10 July 2000, for a preliminary ruling in the               became aware of the dioxin contamination, and of the
appeal proceedings brought by Dr Ralf Sieckmann on the                  appropriateness of the measures taken by it and the impact
following questions:                                                    thereof on the adverse effects and damage sustained by the
                                                                        respondents; and the application in question is made with a
1.   Is Article 2 of the First Council Directive of 21 December         view to the subsequent institution of substantive proceedings
     1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States                  regarding the respective liability of the Belgian State and the
     relating to trade marks (89/104/EEC) (1) to be interpreted         European Community in respect of the dioxin crisis, that
     as meaning that the expression ‘signs capable of being             application constitutes a non-contractual liability claim over
     represented graphically’ covers only those sings which             which the Court of Justice of the European Communities,
     can be reproduced directly in their visible form or is it          alternatively the Court of First Instance of the European
     also to be construed as meaning signs — such as odours             Communities, has exclusive jurisdiction?
     or sounds — which cannot be perceived visually per se
     but can be reproduced indirectly using certain aids?
2.   If the first question is answered in terms of a broad
     interpretation, are the requirements of graphic representa-
     bility set out in Article 2 satisfied where an odour is
     reproduced
     (a)    By a chemical formula;
     (b) By a description (to be published);
     (c)    By means of a deposit, or                                   Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hessisches
                                                                        Finanzgericht by order of that court of 21 February
     (d) By a combination of the abovementioned surrogate               2000 in the case of Turbon International GmbH against
            reproductions?                                              Oberfinanzdirektion Koblenz Zoll- und Verbrauchsteuer-
                                                                                                    abteilung
(1) OJ L of 11 February 1989, p. 1.
                                                                                                 (Case C-276/00)
                                                                                                 (2000/C 259/17)
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van
Beroep te Gent, by order of that court of 28 June 2000                  Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
in the case of the European Community, acting through                   European Communities by order of the Hessisches Finanzge-
the European Commission, against (1) First N.V. and                     richt of 21 February 2000, received at the Court Registry on
                          (2) Franex N.V.                               12 July 2000, for a preliminary ruling the case of Turbon
                                                                        International GmbH against Oberfinanzdirektion Koblenz Zoll
                                                                        und Verbrauchsteuerabteilung on the following question:
                         (Case C-275/00)
                         (2000/C 259/16)
                                                                        Is a compatible ink-jet cartridge, consisting of an ink cartridge
                                                                        (plastic casing, cellular material, metal screen, seals, tape seal,
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  labels), ink and packing materials, where both the ink cartridge
European Communities by order of the Hof van Beroep te                  and the ink can be used solely in an Epson Stylos Color printer,
Gent (Court of Appeal, Ghent) of 28 June 2000, received at
the Court Registry on 12 July 2000, for a preliminary ruling
in the case of the European Community, acting through the               —     to be classified under code number 3215 90 80 as a
European Commission, against (1) First N.V. and (2) Franex                    disposable, ink-filled cartridge (without integrated print
N.V. on the following question:                                               head) for ink-jet printers