CELEX: 62015CA0099
Language: en
Date: 2016-03-17 00:00:00
Title: Case C-99/15: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 17 March 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Christian Liffers v Producciones Mandarina SL, Mediaset España Comunicación SA, formerly Gestevisión Telecinco SA (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Intellectual property — Directive 2004/48/EC — Article 13(1) — Audiovisual work — Infringing activity — Damages — Rules for calculation — Lump sum — Moral prejudice — Inclusion)

2.5.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 156/15
            
         Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 17 March 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Christian Liffers v Producciones Mandarina SL, Mediaset España Comunicación SA, formerly Gestevisión Telecinco SA
   (Case C-99/15) (1)
   
   ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Intellectual property - Directive 2004/48/EC - Article 13(1) - Audiovisual work - Infringing activity - Damages - Rules for calculation - Lump sum - Moral prejudice - Inclusion))
   (2016/C 156/20)
   Language of the case: Spanish
   
      Referring court
   
   Tribunal Supremo
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellant: Christian Liffers
   
      Respondents: Producciones Mandarina SL, Mediaset España Comunicación SA, formerly Gestevisión Telecinco SA
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 13(1) of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights must be interpreted as permitting a party injured by an intellectual property infringement, who claims compensation for his material damage as calculated, in accordance with heading (b) of the second subparagraph of Article 13(1) of that directive, on the basis of the amount of royalties or fees which would have been due to him if the infringer had requested his authorisation to use that right, also to claim compensation for the moral prejudice that he has suffered, as provided for under heading (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 13(1) of that directive.
   
      (1)  OJ C 171, 26.5.2015.