You are on page 1of 1

26.9.

98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 299/5

measures such as designs, symbols or pictograms. The JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
placing in the shop of a supplementary sign adjacent
to the product in question is not sufficient to ensure (Fifth Chamber)
that the ultimate consumer is informed and protected.
of 14 July 1998

(1) OJ C 26, 25.1.1997. in Case C-125/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
(2) OJ L 33, 8.12.1979, p. 1. the Arrondissementsrechtbank te Alkmaar): A. G. R.
Regeling v. Bestuur van de Bedrijfsvereniging voor de
Metaalnijverheid (1)

(Social policy Ð Directive 80/987/EEC Ð Guarantee
institutions' obligation to pay Ð Outstanding claims)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (98/C 299/08)
(Fifth Chamber)
of 14 July 1998
(Language of the case: Dutch)
in Case C-389/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Bundesverwaltungsgericht): Aher-Waggon GmbH v.
Federal Republic of Germany (1)
(Measures having equivalent effect Ð Directives on noise
emissions from aircraft Ð Stricter domestic limits Ð (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
Barrier to the importation of an aircraft Ð Environmental published in the European Court Reports)
protection)
(98/C 299/07)
In Case C-125/97: reference to the Court under Article 177
(Language of the case: German) of the EC Treaty by the Arrondissementsrechtbank te
Alkmaar (Netherlands) for a preliminary ruling in the
proceedings pending before that court between A. G. R.
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be Regeling and Bestuur van de Bedrijfsvereniging voor de
published in the European Court Reports) Metaalnijverheid, on the interpretation of Article 4 of
Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating
In Case C-389/96: reference to the Court under Article 177 to the protection of employees in the event of the
of the EC Treaty from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht insolvency of their employer (2) Ð the Court (Fifth
(Federal Administrative Court) for a preliminary ruling in Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the
the proceedings pending before that court between Aher- Chamber, M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), D. A. O. Edward, J.-
Waggon GmbH and the Federal Republic of Germany, on P. Puissochet and P. Jann, Judges; Advocate General: G.
the interpretation of Article 30 of the EC Treaty Ð the Cosmas; Administrator, L. Hewlett, for the Registrar, has
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, given a judgment on 14 July 1998, the operative part of
President of the Chamber, M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), J. C. which is as follows.
Moitinho de Almeida, P. Jann and L. Sevón, Judges; G.
Cosmas, Advocate General; H. A. Rühl, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
14 July 1998, in which it has ruled: On a proper construction of Article 4(2) of Council
Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating
Article 30 of the EC Treaty does not preclude national to the protection of employees in the event of the
legislation which makes the first registration in national insolvency of their employer, where a worker has,
territory of aircraft previously registered in another simultaneously, claims against his employer in respect of
Member State conditional upon compliance with stricter periods of employment before the reference period laid
noise standards than those laid down by Council Directive down in that provision and claims relating to the reference
80/51/EEC of 20 December 1979 on the limitation of period itself, payments of wages made by the employer
noise emissions from subsonic aircraft, as amended by during the latter period must be set in priority against
Council Directive 83/206/EEC of 21 April 1983, while earlier claims.
exempting from those standards aircraft which obtained
registration in national territory before that Directive was
implemented. (1) OJ C 166, 31.5.1997.
(2) OJ L 283, 20.10.1980, p. 23.
(1) OJ C 26, 8.2.1997.