b'Seedless Nadorcott (left) and seeded variety (right).these, now protected variety constituents. And "the holder has hadAs the CJEUs judgment cannot be reversed, it is therefore very no reasonable opportunity to exercise his right in relation to theimportant for the UPOV Member States to work on a correct inter-said variety constituents". pretation of the cascade, which is continuing in the UPOV working The correct interpretation of the CJEU should therefore havegroup for the Explanatory Notes on Harvested Material.been:Article 13(3) of Regulation No 2100/94 must be interpreted asEditors Note: Huib Ghijsen is retired plant breeder and legal expert.meaning that the fruit of a plant variety, which is not likely to be used as propagating material, may not must, after the grant of the Community plant variety right, be regarded as having been obtained through the unauthorised use of variety constituents of that plant variety, within the meaning of that provision, even where those variety constituents were propagated and sold to a farmer by a nursery in the period between the publication of the application for a Community plant variety right inThis is an abbreviated version. For the full article, see here:relation to that plant variety and the grant thereof. (). aiph.org/nadorcott-case-reconsidered/ 34ISEED WORLD EUROPEISEEDWORLD.COM/EUROPE'