- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-366/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht München (Germany) lodged on 11 August 2008 — Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs eV v Adolf Darbo AG
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008CN0366
62008CN0366
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
25.10.2008
Official Journal of the European Union
C 272/12
(Case C-366/08)
(2008/C 272/21)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs eV
Defendant: Adolf Darbo AG
Questions referred
1.Is the term low-sugar jams in Part A of Annex III to European Parliament and Council Directive 95/2/EC of 20 February 1995 on food additives other than colours and sweeteners (1) to be interpreted as also covering jams named extra jam?
2.If the answer to Question 1 is affirmative:
a)How is the term low-sugar jams in Part A of Annex III to Directive 95/2/EC to be interpreted otherwise?
b)In particular is it to be interpreted as also covering jams named extra jam with a soluble dry matter content of 58 %?
3.If the answers to Questions 1 and 2(b) are affirmative: Is the second paragraph of Part II of Annex I to Council Directive 2001/113/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to fruit jams, jellies and marmalades and sweetened chestnut purée intended for human consumption (2) to be interpreted as meaning that the name extra jam can be authorised also in respect of jams which have a soluble dry matter content of less than 60 % where in the case of such jams no less strict requirements are imposed on the name jam?
(1) OJ 1995 L 61, p. 1.
(2) OJ 2002 L 10, p. 67.