CELEX: C2001/303/03
Language: en
Date: 2001-10-27 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 September 2001 in Case C-374/99: Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the European Communities (EAGGF — Clearance of accounts — 1995 financial year — Aid for consumption of olive oil — Premiums for sheep and goats)

27.10.2001             EN                        Official Journal of the European Communities                                               C 303/3
1.  Where the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual                  forbids the legal order of a Member State to provide, where
    Property Rights (‘the TRIPs Agreement’), as set out in Annex 1                appropriate, that its judicial authorities are to determine of their
    C to the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation,                 own motion the period within which substantive proceedings
    approved on behalf of the Community, as regards matters                       are to be instituted at the same time as ordering provisional
    within its competence, by Council Decision 94/800/EC of                       measures, without any request by the defendant being necessary
    22 December 1994, became applicable in the Member State                       for that purpose.
    concerned at a time when the court of first instance has heard
    the case but not yet delivered its decision, Article 50 of the TRIPs    6.    Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement neither requires nor
    Agreement is applicable to the extent that the infringement of                forbids the Member States to provide, where appropriate, that
    intellectual property rights continues beyond the date on which               its judicial authorities are to determine of their own motion the
    the TRIPs Agreement became applicable with regard to the                      period within which substantive proceedings are to be instituted.
    Community and the Member States.                                              Since the provision in question is silent on that point, the scope
                                                                                  of the powers conferred on appellate courts in that regard falls
                                                                                  within the competence of each Member State.
2.  The procedural requirements of Article 50 of the TRIPs
                                                                            (1) OJ C 136 of 15.5.1999.
    Agreement, and in particular Article 50(6), are not such as to
    create rights upon which individuals may rely directly before the
    Community courts and the courts of the Member States.
    Nevertheless, where the judicial authorities are called upon to
    apply national rules with a view to ordering provisional
    measures for the protection of intellectual property rights falling
    within a field to which the TRIPs Agreement applies and in
    respect of which the Community has already legislated, they are
    required to do so as far as possible in the light of the wording                          JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
    and purpose of Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement, taking
    account, more particularly, of all the circumstances of the case
    before them, so as to ensure that a balance is struck between the                                   (Fifth Chamber)
    competing rights and obligations of the intellectual property
    right holder and of the defendant.
                                                                                                   of 13 September 2001
                                                                            in Case C-374/99: Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the
                                                                                                 European Communities (1)
3.  Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement is to be interpreted as
    meaning that a request by the defendant is necessary in order
    for the provisional measures ordered by way of interim relief to        (EAGGF — Clearance of accounts — 1995 financial year
    lapse on the ground that no substantive action has been brought         — Aid for consumption of olive oil — Premiums for sheep
    either within the period prescribed in the provisional measures                                        and goats)
    or, where no period is prescribed, within 20 working days or
    31 calendar days, whichever is the longer period.                                                   (2001/C 303/03)
                                                                                                (Language of the case: Spanish)
4.  In the absence of any provision in the TRIPs Agreement                  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
    concerning the point in time at which the period of 20 working                               in the European Court Reports)
    days or 31 calendar days prescribed by Article 50(6) of that
    agreement is to start, it is for each contracting party to
    determine when that period is to start, provided always that it         In Case C-374/99: Kingdom of Spain (Agent: M. López-Monı́s
    is ‘reasonable’ having regard to the circumstances of each case         Gallego) v Commission of the European Communities (Agent:
    and taking into account the balance to be struck between the            J. Guerra Fernández) — application for partial annulment of
    competing rights and obligations of the intellectual property           Commission Decision 1999/596/EC of 28 July 1999
    right holder and of the defendant.                                      amending Decision 1999/187/EC on the clearance of the
                                                                            accounts presented by the Member States in respect of the
                                                                            expenditure for 1995 of the Guarantee Section of the European
                                                                            Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 1999
                                                                            L 226, p. 26) in so far as it relates to the Kingdom of Spain —
5.  In the absence of any Community rule on the point and in                the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola,
    accordance with Article 1(1) of the TRIPs Agreement, it is for          President of the Chamber, M. Wathelet, D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann
    each Member State to determine the limits of the powers of the          (Rapporteur) and L. Sevón, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate
    judicial authorities in ordering provisional measures.                  General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 13 Sep-
    Article 50(6) of the TRIPs Agreement neither requires nor               tember 2001, in which it:
 ---pagebreak--- C 303/4                 EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                        27.10.2001
1.    Dismisses the application;                                                             JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
2.    Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.
                                                                                                      (Fifth Chamber)
(1) OJ C 366 of 18.12.1999.
                                                                                                 of 13 September 2001
                                                                           in Case C-417/99: Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                                              ties v Kingdom of Spain (1)
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                     (Failure by a State to comply with its obligations —
                                                                           Directive 96/62/EC — Ambient air quality assessment
                         (Fifth Chamber)                                   and management — Failure to designate the competent
                                                                           authorities and bodies responsible for implementing the
                                                                                                          directive)
                     of 13 September 2001
in Case C-375/99: Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the                                                (2001/C 303/05)
                   European Communities (1)
                                                                                              (Language of the case: Spanish)
(EAGGF — Clearance of accounts — Expenditure for 1996
          and 1997 — Public storage of bovine meat)
                                                                           (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                          (2001/C 303/04)                                                      in the European Court Reports)
                   (Language of the case: Spanish)
                                                                           In Case C-417/99: Commission of the European Communities
                                                                           (Agent: G. Valero Jordana) v Kingdom of Spain (Agent: N. Dı́az
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published     Abad) — application for a declaration that, by failing to
                   in the European Court Reports)                          designate the competent authorities and bodies referred to in
                                                                           the first paragraph of Article 3 of Council Directive 96/62/EC
                                                                           of 27 September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and
In Case C-375/99: Kingdom of Spain (Agent: M. López-Monı́s                management (OJ 1996 L 296, p. 55), the Kingdom of Spain
Gallego) v Commission of the European Communities (Agent:                  has failed to fulfil one of its obligations under that directive —
J. Guerra Fernández) — application for the partial annulment              the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola,
of Commission Decision 1999/603/EC of 28 July 1999                         President of the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur),
excluding from Community financing certain expenditure                     P. Jann, L. Sevón and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; P. Léger,
incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of               Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund                      on 13 September 2001, in which it:
(EAGGF) (OJ 1999 L 234, p. 6), in respect of the financial
adjustment imposed of 5 % of certain expenditure declared by
Spain under tariff headings 2111 (technical expenditure),
2112 (financial expenditure) and 2113 (other expenditure),                 1.    Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period
corresponding to the sector for public storage of bovine meat                    the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
— the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola,                         designate the competent authorities and bodies referred to in the
President of the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann (Rappor-                        first paragraph of Article 3 of Council Directive 96/62/EC of
teur), S. von Bahr and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; L.A. Geel-                     27 September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and
hoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a                         management, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its
judgment on 13 September 2001, in which it:                                      obligations under that directive;
1.    Dismisses the application;                                           2.    Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.
2.    Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.
                                                                           (1) OJ C 20 of 22.1.2000.
( 1) OJ C 366 of 18.12.1999.