Avis juridique important

61973J0138

European Court reports 1973 Page 01341 Greek special edition Page 00797 Portuguese special edition Page 00519

Summary

AGRICULTURE - CEREALS - RICE - EXPORT REFUNDS - PROCESSED PRODUCTS - CLASSIFICATION - FATS - FAT CONTENT - EXAMINATION - ABSENCE OF COMMUNITY RULES - PROBATIVE VALUE - TO BE ASSESSED BY THE NATIONAL COURT

ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 2410/70, READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARTICLE 11 OF REGULATION NO 1052/68, INVOLVES THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF COMMUNITY RULES ON THE SUBJECT THE NATIONAL COURT IS COMPETENT TO ASSESS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF TESTS PERFORMED WITH A VIEW TO ASCERTAINING THE FAT CONTENT OF THE PRODUCTS LISTED AT THE ANNEX TO REGULATION NO 2410/70 UNDER TARIFF HEADINGS 11.02-A-V-(A ) AND 11.02-A-V-(B ).

Parties

IN CASE 138/73 REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE COLLEGE VAN BEROEP VOOR HET BEDRIJFSLEVEN FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT BETWEEN CODRICO NV, ROTTERDAM, AND HOOFDPRODUKTSCHAP VOOR AKKERBOUWPRODUKTEN, THE HAGUE,

Subject of the case

ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 2410/70 OF THE COMMISSION OF 27 NOVEMBER 1970, FIXING THE REFUNDS TO BE APPLIED TO THE EXPORT OF PRODUCTS PROCESSED FROM CEREALS AND FROM RICE ( OJ L 260, 1 . 12 . 1970, P . 21 ) TAKEN TOGETHER WITH ARTICLE 11 OF REGULATION NO 1052/68 OF THE COUNCIL OF 25 JULY 1968, ON THE IMPORT AND EXPORT SYSTEM FOR SUCH PRODUCTS ( OJ L 179, 25 . 7 . 1968, P . 8 ).

Grounds

1 BY DECISION OF 29 MAY 1973, LODGED AT THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT ON 30 MAY 1973, THE COLLEGE VAN BEROEP VOOR HET BEDRIJFSLEVEN PUT TWO QUESTIONS TO THE COURT, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY, ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 11 OF REGULATION NO 1052/68 OF THE COUNCIL OF 23 JULY 1968 ON THE IMPORT AND EXPORT SYSTEM FOR PRODUCTS PROCESSED FROM CEREALS AND FROM RICE ( OJ L 179, 25 . 7 . 1968, P . 8 ), AND OF ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 2410/70 OF THE COMMISSION OF 27 NOVEMBER 1970 FIXING THE REFUNDS TO BE APPLIED TO THE EXPORT OF SUCH PRODUCTS ( OJ L 260, 1 . 12 . 1970, P . 21 ).

2 IT APPEARS FROM THE DECISION MAKING THE REFERENCE THAT THESE QUESTIONS WERE RAISED IN THE CONTEXT OF PROCEEDINGS CONCERNING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE FAT CONTENT OF MAIZE MEAL EXPORTED FROM ROTTERDAM TO NORWAY, FOR WHICH AN ADVANCE FIXING CERTIFICATE HAD BEEN GRANTED FOR THE PURPOSES OF REFUNDS ON EXPORTS TO THIRD COUNTRIES .

3 THE FIRST QUESTION ASKS WHETHER THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 2410/70 - READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARTICLE 11 OF REGULATION NO 1052/68 - INVOLVES THAT, SO LONG AS NO EFFECT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE PROVISION IN ARTICLE 11 OF REGULATION NO 1052/68, IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARTICLE 26 OF REGULATION NO 120/67, FOR THE DETERMINATION OF A METHOD OF ASSESSING THE FAT CONTENT FOR THE APPLICATION OF REGULATION NO 1052/68, THE FAT CONTENT OF PRODUCTS MENTIONED IN THE ANNEX TO REGULATION NO 2410/70 UNDER TARIFF HEADINGS 11.02-A-V-(A ) AND 11.02-A-V-(B ) MUST BE DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE METHOD FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF CRUDE FAT DESCRIBED IN THE ANNEX TO THE SECOND DIRECTIVE OF THE COMMISSION OF 18 NOVEMBER 1971 RELATING TO THE DETERMINATION OF COMMUNITY METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR THE OFFICIAL CONTROL OF FEEDINGSTUFFS ( OJ L 279, 20 . 12 . 1971, P . 7 ).

4 THE SECOND QUESTION ASKS WHETHER THE LAST-MENTIONED METHOD MUST BE USED EXCLUSIVELY OR WHETHER OTHER METHODS MAY ALSO BE ADOPTED, FOR EXAMPLE THAT ADOPTED BY THE PLAINTIFFS IN THE MAIN ACTION, OR THAT APPLIED BY THE LABORATORY TO WHICH HIS NORWEGIAN CUSTOMER HAD RECOURSE .

5 ARTICLE 11 OF REGULATION NO 1052/68 LAYS DOWN THAT, FOR ITS APPLICATION, THE METHODS TO BE USED FOR ASSESSING THE FAT CONTENT OF PRODUCTS PROCESSED FROM CEREALS AND RICE WILL BE ESTABLISHED .

6 THESE PROVISIONS HAVE NOT YET BEEN INTRODUCED .

7 THE SECOND COMMISSION DIRECTIVE OF 18 NOVEMBER 1971 STATES THAT THE LAWS, REGULATIONS OR ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAID DIRECTIVE SHOULD BE INTRODUCED WITHIN THE MEMBER STATES ON 1 JANUARY 1973 AT THE LATEST .

8 THE MAIN ACTION IS CONCERNED WITH THE PERIOD FROM DECEMBER 1970 TO FEBRUARY 1971, DURING WHICH THIS DIRECTIVE HAD NOT YET BEEN ISSUED .

9 ACCORDINGLY, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY COMMUNITY RULES ON THIS SUBJECT, IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO ASSESS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF TESTS MADE ON THE PRODUCTS AT ISSUE .

10 MOREOVER, IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO SAY WHETHER THE CASE IS CONCERNED WITH ANIMAL FEEDINGSTUFFS, OR, AS THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION MAINTAINS, WITH PRODUCTS WHICH CANNOT BE COMPARED WITH SUCH FEEDINGSTUFFS .

Decision on costs

11 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, WHICH HAS SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT, ARE NOT RECOVERABLE, AND AS THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE, IN SO FAR AS THE PARTIES TO THE MAIN ACTION ARE CONCERNED, A STEP IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE A NATIONAL COURT, THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT .

Operative part

THE COURT IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS REFERRED TO IT BY THE COLLEGE VAN BEROEP VOOR HET BEDRIJFSLEVEN, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DECISION OF THAT COURT DATED 29 MAY 1973, HEREBY RULES :

ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 2410/70, READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARTICLE 11 OF REGULATION NO 1052/68, INVOLVES THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF COMMUNITY RULES ON THE SUBJECT THE NATIONAL COURT IS COMPETENT TO ASSESS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF TESTS PERFORMED WITH A VIEW TO ASCERTAINING THE FAT CONTENT OF THE PRODUCTS LISTED AT THE ANNEX TO REGULATION NO 2410/70 UNDER TARIFF HEADINGS 11.02-A-V-(A ) AND 11.02-A-V-(B ).