This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010CN0034
Case C-34/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 21 January 2010 — Prof. Dr. Oliver Brüstle v Greenpeace e.V.
Case C-34/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 21 January 2010 — Prof. Dr. Oliver Brüstle v Greenpeace e.V.
Case C-34/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 21 January 2010 — Prof. Dr. Oliver Brüstle v Greenpeace e.V.
OJ C 100, 17.4.2010, p. 19–19
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
17.4.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 100/19 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 21 January 2010 — Prof. Dr. Oliver Brüstle v Greenpeace e.V.
(Case C-34/10)
2010/C 100/29
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Bundesgerichtshof
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Prof. Dr. Oliver Brüstle
Defendant: Greenpeace e.V.
Questions referred
1. |
What is meant by the term ‘human embryos’ in Article 6(2)(c) of Directive 98/44/EC? (1)
|
2. |
What is meant by the expression ‘uses of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes’? Does it include any commercial exploitation within the meaning of Article 6(1) of the Directive, especially use for the purposes of scientific research? |
3. |
Is technical teaching to be considered unpatentable pursuant to Article 6(2)(c) of the Directive even if the use of human embryos does not form part of the technical teaching claimed with the patent, but is a necessary precondition for the application of that teaching,
|
(1) Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions (OJ 1998 L 213, p. 13).