14. Based on new documents from OICA (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2025/18, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2025/20, GRE-93-22, GRE-93-27-Rev.2) and Germany (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2025/21, GRE-93-26), GRE reverted to the prohibition of approving a road illumination device with an illuminated manufacturer logo. These proposals were accompanied by draft amendments to UN Regulation No. 149. The expert from OICA held the view that this new restriction could only be introduced by means of a new series of amendments with transitional provisions, while the experts from Germany, Netherlands (Kingdom of the) and EC believed that was only a clarification which could be made by a Supplement without transitional provisions. In spite of extensive discussions, GRE did not reach a conclusion and agreed to continue consideration at the next session.

27. GRE recalled that the proposal on an illuminated manufacturer logo submitted by the expert from Germany (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2025/21) was discussed under agenda item 6 (a) (see paras. 14 above).

14. Based on new documents from OICA (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2025/18, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2025/20, GRE-93-22, GRE-93-27-Rev.2) and Germany (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2025/21, GRE-93-26), GRE reverted to the prohibition of approving a road illumination device with an illuminated manufacturer logo. These proposals were accompanied by draft amendments to UN Regulation No. 149. The expert from OICA held the view that this new restriction could only be introduced by means of a new series of amendments with transitional provisions, while the experts from Germany, Netherlands (Kingdom of the) and EC believed that was only a clarification which could be made by a Supplement without transitional provisions. In spite of extensive discussions, GRE did not reach a conclusion and agreed to continue consideration at the next session.