Opinion of Mr Advocate General Darmon delivered on 10 March 1989
1 Original language French.
2 Sec in particular the judgments of 29 February 1968 m Case 24/67 Parke, Dami & Co. v Centrafarm [1968] ECR 55, of 31 October 1974 in Case 15/74 Centra/arm v Sterling Dryg [1974] ECR 1147, of 31 October 1974 in Case 16/74 Centra/arm v Winthrop [1974] ECR 1183, of 20 May 1976 in Case 104/75 de Peijper [1976] ECR 613, of 23 May 1978 in Case 102/77 Hoffmann-La Roche v Centrafarm [1978] ECR 1139, of 10 October 1978 in Case 3/78 Centrafarm v American Home Products Corporation [1978] ECR 1823, of 14 July 1981 in Case 187/80 Merelt v Stephar and Exler (1981) ECR 2063 and of 3 December 1981 in Case 1/81 Pfizerv Eunm-Pharm [1981] ECR 2913
3 Cited above in footnote 1
4 Paragraphs 1.4.(ii) and (iv).
5 Statement of 12 July 1986 confirmed by a letter of 12 August 1986 rejecting a request to revoke that statement.
6 Ci ted above in footnote 1, paragraphs 15, 20, 21 and 22.
7 I use this term in my opinion for the sake of convenience. To my mind, it is clear that such usage does not reflect any reservations about the equivalence between the prescribed product and the product supplied in such a case.
8 Judgment of 22 September 1988 in Case 45/87 Commission v Ireland [1988) ECR 4929
9 Judgment of 24 November 1982 in Case 249/81 Commission v Ireland [1982] ECR 4005
10 Judgment of 1 October 1987 in Case 311/85 Vlttamie Renbureaus [1987] ECR 3801.
11 Judgment of 11 July 1974 in Case 8/74 Procureur du Roi v Dassonville [1974] ECR 837.
12 Judgment of 31 March 1982 in Case 175/81 Blesgen v Belgium [1982] ECR 1211, in particular paragraphs at
13 Judgment of 7 February 1984 in Case 238/82 Duphar BV and Others v Netherlands [1984] ECR 525.
14 Paragraph 20, my emphasis.
15 Case 238/82 Duphar, cited above, paragraph 20, my emphasis.
16 Cited above, footnote 1.
17 Paragraph 11, my emphasis.
18 Paragraph 12.
19 Paragraph 13, my emphasis.
20 Paragraph 17.
21 Case 3/78 Centra/arm v American Home Products, cited above, paragraph 15.