CELEX: C1995/351/06
Language: en
Date: 1995-12-30 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Juzgado de lo Social No 16 by order of that court of 1 September 1995 in the case of Pedro Burdalo and Others against Fondo de Garantía Salarial (Case C-336/95)

30 . 12 . 95             EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      No C 351 /3
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du Travail,              Garanti'a Salarial on the basis that the full length of service is
Liege ( Second Chamber ) by judgment of that court of                     not taken into account but that some of the periods of
10 October 1995             in the case of Institut National              employment are excluded, notwithstanding the fact that
d'Assurances Sociales pour Travailleurs Independants                      work was performed uninterruptedly for an undertaking
                     (Inasti ) v. Michel Picard                           which was transferred, without infringing Article 1(1 ) and
                          ( Case C-335 /95 )                              the second subparagraph of Article 3 ( 3 ) of Council
                                                                          Directive 77/ 187/EEC ?
                             ( 95/C 351 /05 )
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by a judgment of the Cour du
Travail ( Higher Labour Court), Liege ( Second Chamber ) of
10 October 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry
on 23 October 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of              Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der
Institut National d'Assurances Sociales pour Travailleurs                 Nederlanden by judgment of that court of 20 October 1995
Independants ( Inasti ) v. Michel Picard on the following                 in the Case of 1 . Parfums Christian Dior SA, 2 . Parfums
questions :                                                                                Christian Dior BV v. Evora BY
                                                                                                   ( Case C-337/95 )
1 . Does Article 36 ( 4 ) of Council Regulation ( EEC )                                              ( 95/C 351 /07 )
     No 574/72 (') laying down the procedure for
     implementing Regulation ( EEC ) No 1408/71 on the
     application of social security schemes to employed                   Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
     persons, to self-employed persons and to members of                  European Communities by a judgment of the Hoge Raad
     their families moving within the Community lay down a                der Nederlanden ( Supreme Court of the Netherlands ) of
     general independent rule which applies irrespective of               20 October 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry
     compliance with the provisions of Article 36 (1 ), ( 2 ) and         on 26 October 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of
     ( 3 )?
                                                                          1 . Parfums Christian Dior SA, established in Paris,
                                                                          2 . Parfums Christian Dior BV, established at Rotterdam, v.
                                                                          Evora BV on the following questions :
2 . If the reply to the first question is in the negative , must an
     employed or a self-employed person who cannot,
     without prior recognition of entitlement to a pension by             ( a ) where, in proceedings relating to trade marks in one of
                                                                                 the    Benelux   countries    in   connection     with    the
     the competent institution of another Member State ( in
     the present case , the Member State of which he is a                        interpretation of the Uniform Benelux Law on Trade
     national ), obtain the recognition of entitlement to a                      Marks, a question relating to the interpretation of the
     pension by the competent institution of his State of                        First Council Directive 89/ 104/EEC ( ] ) of 21 December
     residence , nevertheless submit a claim in the State of                     1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States
     residence    in    order      for  benefits  to   be  awarded               relating to trade marks arises, is the highest national
     concurrently in both States ?                                               court or the Benelux Court to be regarded as the court
                                                                                 or tribunal of the Member State against whose
                                                                                 decisions there is no remedy under national law and
(') O J No L 74 , p . 1 .
                                                                                 which is therefore obliged under the third paragraph of
                                                                                 Article 1 77 of the EC Treaty to make a reference to the
                                                                                 Court of Justice ?
                                                                           ( b ) Is it in keeping with the system of the aforementioned
                                                                                 Directive , in particular Articles 5 , 6 and 7 thereof, to
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Juzgado de lo                          assume that, where it is a question of the resale of goods
Social No 16 by order of that court of 1 September 1995 in                       which have been put on the market in the Community
the case of Pedro Burdalo and Others against Fondo de                            under a trade mark by the trade mark proprietor or
                           Garantia Salarial
                                                                                 with his consent, the reseller is also free to use that trade
                             Case C-336/95 )                                     mark for the purposes of bringing such further
                              ( 95/C 351 /06 )                                   commercialization to the attention of the public ?
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                     (c ) In the event that question ( b ) is answered in the
 European Communities by order of the Juzgado de lo Social                       affirmative, do exceptions exist to that rule ?
 ( Social Court ) No 16 of 1 September 1995 , which was
 received at the Court Registry on 26 October 1995 , for a                 ( d ) In the event that question ( c ) is answered in the
 preliminary ruling in the case of Pedro Burdalo and Others                      affirmative, is there room for an exception where the
 against Fondo de Garanti'a Salarial on the following                             advertising function of the trade mark is endangered by
 question :                                                                      the fact that, as a result of the manner in which the
                                                                                  reseller uses the trade mark in order to attract public
 may the legislation or the case-law of a Member State reduce                     attention in that way, he damages the luxurious and
 the benefits which must be awarded by the Fondo de                               prestigious image of the trade mark ?