51According to settled case-law, the need for a uniform interpretation of European Union directives makes it impossible for the text of a provision to be considered, in case of doubt, in isolation; on the contrary, it requires that it be interpreted and applied in the light of the versions existing in the other official languages (see, to that effect, Case C-296/95 EMU Tabac and Others [1998] ECR I-1605, paragraph 36; Case C-321/96 Mecklenburg [1998] ECR I-3809, paragraph 29; Case C-375/07 Heuschen & Schrouff Oriental Foods Trading [2008] ECR I-8691, paragraph 46; and Case C-199/08 Eschig [2009] ECR I-8295, paragraph 54). In addition, where there is divergence between the various language versions of a European Union text, the provision in question must be interpreted by reference to the purpose and general scheme of the rules of which it forms part (see Case C-437/97 EKW and Wein & Co. [2000] ECR I-1157, paragraph 42; Case C-457/05 Schutzverband der Spirituosen-Industrie [2007] ECR I-8075, paragraph 18; and Case C-239/07 Sabatauskas and Others [2008] ECR I-7523, paragraph 39).
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.