Opinion of Mr Advocate General Mischo delivered on 21 June 1988

1 Translated from the French.

2 In addition to the documents before the Court, I have read with great interest the thesis entitled La protection des pièces de carrosserie automobile en droit communautairepresented in 1987 by Fabrice Picod to the Faculty of Law of the Jean Moulin University (Lyon III) under the supervision of Professor Azema.

3 But not against other motor vehicle manufacturers.

4 See in particular judgment of 8 November 1979 in Case 15/79 Groenveld v Produktschap voor Vee en Vlees [1979] ECR 3409.

5 See the judgment of 14 September 1982 in Case 144/81 Keurkoop v Nancy Kean Gifts [1982] ECR 2853, at pp. 2870 and 2871, paragraphs 18 and 24.

6 Judgment of 17 May 1988 in Case 158/86 Warner Brothers Inc. and Metronome Video ApS v Erik Viuff Christiansen [1988] ECR 2605, in particular paragraphs 11, 15 and 16.

7 In this respect, I would refer also to my Opinion of 28 April 1988 in Case 35/87 (judgment of 30 June 1988) Thetford v Fiamma [1988] ECR 3585, at p. 3594, paragraphs 20 and 23.

8 Judgments of 31 October 1974 in Case 15/74 Centrafarm v Sterling Drug [1974] ECR 1147, of 14 July 1981 in Case 187/80 Merck v Stephar and Exler [1981] ECR 2063, and of 9 July 1985 in Case 29/84 Pharmon v Hoechst [1985] ECR 2281.

9 Case 40/70 Sirena v Eda [1971] ECR 69, paragraph 16; Case 78/80 Deutsche Grammophon v Melro [1971] ECR 487, paragraph 16.