- 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
Order of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 29 April 1999. # Unione provinciale degli agricoltori di Firenze, Unione pratese degli agricoltori, Consorzio produttori dell'olio tipico di oliva della provincia di Firenze, Francesco Miari Fulcis, Bonaccorso Gondi, Simone Giannozzi and Antonio Morino v Commission of the European Communities. # Action for annulment - Regulation (EC) No 644/98 - Registration of a geographical indication - "Tuscan" olive oil - Interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissible. # Case T-78/98.
ECLI:EU:T:1999:87
61998TO0078
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
Avis juridique important
61998B0078
European Court reports 1999 Page II-01377
Summary
Keywords
Actions for annulment - Interest in bringing proceedings - Regulation registering a name as a protected geographical indication pursuant to Regulation No 2081/92 - Action brought by producers using a name other than that registered and by associations representing the interests of those producers - Inadmissible (EC Treaty, Art. 173, fourth para.; Council Regulation No 2081/92, Art. 13; Commission Regulation No 644/98)
Summary
The admissibility of an action for annulment brought by a natural or legal person is dependent upon the condition that the person concerned demonstrate a legal interest in bringing proceedings. In particular, he must be able to demonstrate a personal interest in the annulment of the contested decision. Consequently, an action is inadmissible which is brought by olive oil producers for annulment of Regulation No 644/98 in so far as that measure registers the name `Toscano' as a protected geographical indication, where those producers use other names for the marketing of their products. In that connection it is irrelevant that those names are defined as `geographical sub-areas' or `variants' in the product specification drawn up for the purposes of registering the name `Toscano', since they are not registered names within the meaning of Article 13 of Regulation No 2081/92 and no Community protection whatever is conferred on them under that regulation. Since, therefore, the commercial use of those names by olive-oil producers like the applicants is not affected by Regulation No 644/98, and their right to submit an application for registration of the names in question as designations of origin or geographical indications remains unimpaired, the maintenance in force of Regulation No 644/98 can in no way affect their interests. An action for annulment of Regulation No 644/98 is also inadmissible where brought by associations which rely solely on the fact that they represent the interests of olive oil producers using the names at issue, and do not refer to individual producers other than the applicants, whose action for annulment of that regulation is inadmissible. Unless there are special circumstances such as the role played in the procedure leading to adoption of the act at issue, an action for annulment brought by such an association is inadmissible if it could not have been brought by the association's members individually.