Reports of Cases

2007 I-03115

Subject-matter

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Cour d'appel de Bruxelles (Brussels Court of Appeal) – Interpretation of Article 2(2a) and Article 3a(b) of Council Directive 84/450/EEC of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising (OJ 1984 L 250, p.17), as amended by Directive 97/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 1997 amending Directive 84/450/EEC concerning misleading advertising so as to include comparative advertising (OJ 1997 L 290, p. 18) – Comparative advertising – Identification of a competitor or of the goods or services offered by a competitor – Use for advertising a beer of terms referring to characteristics of sparkling wines and more specifically Champagne

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• Directive 84/450 -A02PT2BIS : paragraphs 1, 3, 24, 27, 42, 44, 45, 47, 49
• Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1 : paragraphs 4, 52, 53, 56
• Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1LB : paragraphs 1, 29, 44, 45, 47 - 49
• Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1LF : paragraphs 1, 58, 61, 64, 70 - 72
• Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1LG : paragraphs 64, 68
• Regulation 2081/92 -A13 : paragraph 59
• Regulation 2081/92 -A13P1 : paragraphs 5, 60
• Directive 97/55 : paragraphs 1, 59, 62
• Directive 97/55 -C2 : paragraph 34
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -170/78 : paragraphs 30, 36, 37
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -356/85 : paragraph 30
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -112/99 : paragraphs 16, 17, 35, 69
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -44/01 : paragraphs 16, 23, 35
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -356/04 : paragraphs 23, 35, 44
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -59/05 : paragraph 69

Operative part

• Interprets : Directive 84/450 -A02PT2BIS
• Interprets : Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1
• Interprets : Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1LB
• Interprets : Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1LF

Opinion

• Directive 84/450 : points 3, 44, 45
  
• Directive 84/450 -A02PT2BIS : points 4, 28, 29, 32, 35, 38, 43, 45, 46, 52, 56, 61, 62, 64, 65, 68, 70, 71, 73 - 75, 79, 82, 83, 85, 86, 88, 91, 93 - 96, 99 - 102
  
• Directive 84/450 -A03BIS : points 5, 37, 38
  
• Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1LA : point 101
  
• Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1LB : points 62, 91 - 96, 98 - 100, 102, 103
  
• Directive 84/450 -A03BISP1LC : points 39, 41, 101
  
• Directive 97/55 : points 3, 33, 34, 36, 41, 42, 44, 89
  
• Directive 97/55 -C6 : points 28, 31, 32
  
• Directive 97/55 -C11 : point 40
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -210/96 : point 43
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -220/98 : point 43
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -112/99 : points 28, 32, 101
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -44/01 : points 28, 43, 101
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -99/01 : point 43
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -356/04 : points 43, 97, 101
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -59/05 : point 101
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

• 19/10/2005

Date of the Opinion

• 30/11/2006

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

19/04/2007

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 10 from 14.01.2006, p.10

Judgment: OJ C 96 from 28.04.2007, p.11

Name of the parties

De Landtsheer Emmanuel

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Rondey, Céline: Publicité comparative et appellation d'origine, Recueil Le Dalloz 2007 p.1419
2. Riemer, Boris: Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2007 p.383-384
3. González Vaqué, Luis: Sobre la licitud de la publicidad comparativa referente a productos con denominación de origen: las paradojas de la sentencia "Malheur Brut Réserve", Gaceta Jurídica de la C.E. y de la Competencia 2007 nº 248 p.82-92
4. Schubmehl, Silvan: Zur Zulässigkeit von Werbeaussagen in Bezug auf Warengattungen. Anmerkungen zu EuGH, Urteil vom 19.4.2007, C-381/05 - De Landtsheer Emmanuel SA/Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne und Veuve Cliquot Ponsardin SA, Zeitschrift für Gemeinschaftsprivatrecht 2007 p.194-198
5. Fusi, Maurizio: Pubblicità comparativa e denominazioni d'origine, Il diritto industriale 2007 p.393-400
6. Anadon, Coralie: Publicité comparative et effervescence, Revue Lamy droit des affaires 2007 nº 16 p.53-54
7. Adobati, Enrica: La Corte di giustizia interpreta la direttiva sulla pubblicità ingannevole e comparativa, Diritto comunitario e degli scambi internazionali 2007 p.336-337
8. Silvestri, Paola: La pubblicità comparativa: tra essere e non essere, Diritto pubblico comparato ed europeo 2007 p.1406-1413
9. Roland, Nicolas: Quand la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes risque de faire le "malheur" des appellations d'origine, Droit de la consommation 2007 p.272-276
10. Anthimos, A.: Armenopoulos 2007 p.2017-2018
11. Martínez Javalambre, A.: Los límites de la publicidad comparativa referente a productos con denominación de origen: la sentencia "Malheur Brut Réserve", Revista de Derecho Alimentario 2007 nº 24 p.13-19
12. Puttemans, Andrée: Publicité comparative et appellation d'origine: la Cour de justice veille à ne pas pousser le bouchon trop loin, Revue de jurisprudence de Liège, Mons et Bruxelles 2008 p.137-149
13. Blankenburg, Daniel: Gespaltenes Verständnis des Mitbewerberbegriffs im UWG?, Wettbewerb in Recht und Praxis 2008 p.186-192
14. Magri, Geo: Pubblicità comparativa e prodotti a denominazione d'origine, Giurisprudenza italiana 2008 p.580-585

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Cour d'appel de Bruxelles - Belgium

Subject-matter

• Approximation of laws
  
• Consumer protection
  

Provisions of national law referred to

Loi du 14/07/1991, art. 22, 23 et 23bis

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

• Reference for a preliminary ruling
  

Formation of the Court

première chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Cunha Rodrigues

Advocate General

Mengozzi

Language(s) of the Case

• French
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• Italian