EUROPE LAW

Ministere Public v Deserbais [1988]



Ministere Public v Deserbais [1988]

Case Analysis

As per the interpretation of the EEC Treaty's Article 30 which was regarding national legislation to protect the trading name of a kind of cheese in relation with the Designations of Origin and the names were signed on June 1st, 1951 at Stresa. The court was composed of some people such as: President Bosco, Lord Stuart, O. Due, G. C. Iglesias, K. Bahlmann, C. N. Kakouris, R. Joliét, O'Higgins, and Judges Advocate General Gordon Slynn and Registrar: Louterman.

After seeing all the considerations which were submitted on the Deserbais's behalf by the Merchkel of the Strasbourg Bar in the formats of writing as well as hearing by P. Peguet. The written procedure was done by Peter Kalbe who was an agent and hearing was done by C. Durand who was also an agent of the Legal Department. Mr. Fiestra was having regard for the hearing and the other hearing on Feruary 2nd, 1988 as, after that they had to deliver his opinion to the Advocate General on March 17th, 1988. The main statements of the court case were as under:

Under the EEC Treaty's question of Article 30 the case was received by the court on November 20th 1986 by the October 1986's judgments. The treaty was regarding the protection of the trading name of some particular cheese by the national legislation.

The queries were raised up against Deserbais in the criminal procedures as the Deserbais was the dairy product's director and that time was marketing and importing his product in France with the trading name of 'Edam' from the Government of Germany. The Edam cheeses contained 34.3% of the fat content, while the name as the Edam for the cheese product was restricted for a kind of cheese that have minimum of 40 percent fat contents. The rule was by the French legislations. The legislation was enforced to the International Convention on the use of designated origins and the trading name for a particular type of cheese was signed on June 1st, 1951 at Stresa which is after then regarded as the Convention of Stresa.

It was appeared in the form of documents prior to the Court as Deserbais was proved guilty as well as fined by the applicable legislation of France in charge of using a trading name unlawfully for a product. In the key proceedings, the accused brought a claim before the court in substance as the there had been legal production of the German Edam and it was traditionally marketed in the French Republic and authorities were not able to stop its significance into Germany. The customers were provided adequate information that relied upon Convention of Stresa for avoiding the appeal of the local provisions.

The appeal of the court noted that it was something about really uncomplicated as the product of cheeses was legally as well as traditionally marketed and manufactured In the German Republic under the name of Edam that overall provisions regarding that was ...