- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-519/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Bari (Italy) lodged on 27 October 2010 — Giovanni Colapietro v Ispettorato Centrale Repressioni Frodi
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CN0519
62010CN0519
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
15.1.2011
Official Journal of the European Union
C 13/21
(Case C-519/10)
()
2011/C 13/40
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Giovanni Colapietro
Defendant: Ispettorato Centrale Repressioni Frodi
Questions referred
1.What is the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, that is to say, its spatial and temporal application, and the purpose thereof as regards penalties, with respect to the 1993/94 wine year, the period to which the case at issue relates?
2.Is it true that Article 39 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 was implemented, in respect of the 1993/94 wine year, by Regulation (EEC) No 343/94 of 15 February 1994 and replaced with that regulation?
3.Is the application of the fine of LIT 390 250 000 (now EUR 201 547,30 — two hundred and one thousand five hundred and forty seven point 30 euros) for failure to deliver for compulsory distillation — in respect of the 1993/94 wine year — 7 084,87 hl of table wine, that volume having been calculated by applying the compulsory distillation quota to the lees produced (15 155 hl) (the yield being 126 hl/ha and the compulsory distillation quota being 51.5 %, in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 610/94) disproportionate in effect to the offences and in breach of the principle of fair punishment, which has been set out many times by the Court of Justice?
Language of the case: Italian
(1) OJ 1987 L 84, p. 1.
(2) OJ 1987 L 44, p. 9.
(3) OJ 1994 L 77, p. 12.