Odbor kompatibility s právem ES
Úřad vlády ČR
I S A P
Informační Systém pro Aproximaci Práva
Databáze č. 17 : Databáze judikatury
ă Odbor kompatibility s právem ES, Úřad vlády ČR - určeno pouze pro potřebu ministerstev a ostatních ústředních orgánů

Číslo (Kód CELEX):
Number (CELEX Code):		61989J0309
Název:
Title: 		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 18 MAY 1994. CODORNIU SA V COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. ACTION FOR ANNULMENT - REGULATION - NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSON - CONDITIONS OF ADMISSIBILITY OF THE ACTION - DESCRIPTION OF SPARKLING WINES - CONDITIONS FOR THE USE OF THE TERM' CREMANT'. CASE C-309/89.
Publikace:
Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1994 PAGES I-1853
Předmět (klíčová slova):
Keywords		AGRICULTURE;WINE;
Související předpisy:
Corresponding acts:		389R2045;385R3309
Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty:
Corresponding Judgements:
Plný text:
Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:


Názor soudu a komentář:


Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
1. ALTHOUGH IT IS TRUE THAT ACCORDING TO THE CRITERIA IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 173 OF THE TREATY A PROVISION OF A REGULATION RESERVING THE USE OF THE TERM "CRÉMANT" TO SPARKLING QUALITY WINES PRODUCED IN A SPECIFIED REGION AND MANUFACTURED UNDER SPECIFIC CONDITIONS IN TWO MEMBER STATES IS, BY NATURE AND BY VIRTUE OF ITS SPHERE OF APPLICATION, OF A LEGISLATIVE NATURE IN THAT IT APPLIES TO THE TRADERS CONCERNED IN GENERAL, THAT DOES NOT PREVENT IT FROM BEING OF INDIVIDUAL CONCERN TO SOME OF THEM. THUS AN UNDERTAKING, ESTABLISHED IN A THIRD MEMBER STATE, MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING SPARKLING QUALITY WINES PRODUCED IN A SPECIFIED REGION, WHICH, WELL BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF THE REGULATION, REGISTERED IN THAT MEMBER STATE A GRAPHIC MARK CONTAINING THAT SAME TERM AND USED IT BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER REGISTRATION, IS IN A POSITION WHICH DIFFERENTIATES IT, FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE SAID PROVISION, FROM ALL OTHER PERSONS IN THAT THE PROVISION PREVENTS IT FROM USING ITS GRAPHIC TRADE MARK.

2. UNDER THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN COMMUNITY PRODUCERS OR CONSUMERS, WHICH IS ENSHRINED IN THE SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 40(3) OF THE EEC TREATY AND WHICH INCLUDES THE PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF NATIONALITY LAID DOWN IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 7 OF THE TREATY, COMPARABLE SITUATIONS MUST NOT BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY AND DIFFERENT SITUATIONS MUST NOT BE TREATED IN THE SAME WAY UNLESS SUCH TREATMENT IS OBJECTIVELY JUSTIFIED. IT FOLLOWS THAT THE CONDITIONS OF PRODUCTION OR CONSUMPTION MAY NOT BE DIFFERENTIATED EXCEPT BY REFERENCE TO OBJECTIVE CRITERIA WHICH ENSURE A PROPORTIONATE DIVISION OF THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES FOR THOSE CONCERNED WITHOUT DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES. ARTICLE 1(2)(C) OF COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) NO 2045/89, WHICH INSERTS PARAGRAPH 5A(B) INTO ARTICLE 6 OF COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) NO 3309/85 LAYING DOWN GENERAL RULES FOR THE DESCRIPTION AND PRESENTATION OF SPARKLING WINES AND AERATED SPARKLING WINES, RESERVES THE USE OF THE TERM "CRÉ
MANT" TO WINES PRODUCED IN TWO MEMBER STATES AND THUS PRECLUDES THE USE OF THE SAID TERM TO DESCRIBE SPARKLING WINES PRODUCED UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS IN A THIRD MEMBER STATE AND SOLD UNDER A GRAPHIC MARK WITH THE SAME TERM REGISTERED IN THAT STATE, TREATS COMPARABLE SITUATIONS DIFFERENTLY. THE RESERVATION OF THE SAID TERM TO WINES PRODUCED IN TWO MEMBER STATES CANNOT VALIDLY BE JUSTIFIED EITHER ON THE BASIS OF TRADITIONAL USE, SINCE IT DISREGARDS THE TRADITIONAL USE OF THAT MARK IN THE THIRD STATE FOR WINES OF THE SAME KIND, OR BY THE INDICATION OF ORIGIN ASSOCIATED WITH THE MARK IN QUESTION, SINCE IT IS IN ESSENCE ATTRIBUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE METHOD OF MANUFACTURE OF THE PRODUCT AND NOT ITS ORIGIN. IT FOLLOWS THAT THE DIFFERENT TREATMENT HAS NOT BEEN OBJECTIVELY JUSTIFIED AND THE SAID PROVISION MUST THEREFORE BE DECLARED VOID.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):