# C_2006074EN.01000403.xml

| 25.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 74/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/4

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf by order of that court of 2 January 2006 in Jülich AG v Hauptzollamt Aachen

(Case C-5/06)

(2006/C 74/10)

Language of the case: German

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Finanzgericht (Finance Court) Düsseldorf (Germany) of 2 January 2006, received at the Court Registry on 9 January 2006, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Jülich AG and Hauptzollamt Aachen on the following questions:

| 1. | Is Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 (1) of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector to be interpreted as meaning that, when determining the exportable surplus, account should be taken only of those export quantities of sugar, isoglucose and inulin syrup in respect of which export refunds have actually been paid? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 (1) of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector to be interpreted as meaning that, when determining the exportable surplus, account should be taken only of those export quantities of sugar, isoglucose and inulin syrup in respect of which export refunds have actually been paid?

1

| 2. | If Question 1 is to be answered in the affirmative: Is Article 6(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 314/2002 (2) of 20 February 2002 laying down detailed rules for the application of the quota system in the sugar sector, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1140/2003 (3) of 27 June 2003, invalid? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If Question 1 is to be answered in the affirmative: Is Article 6(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 314/2002 (2) of 20 February 2002 laying down detailed rules for the application of the quota system in the sugar sector, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1140/2003 (3) of 27 June 2003, invalid?

2

3

| 3. | If Question 1 is to be answered in the negative: Is Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector to be interpreted as meaning that, when determining both the exportable surplus and the average loss per tonne of sugar, all exports are to be taken into account, even where no export refunds were paid in respect of a portion of those exports in the relevant marketing year? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If Question 1 is to be answered in the negative: Is Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector to be interpreted as meaning that, when determining both the exportable surplus and the average loss per tonne of sugar, all exports are to be taken into account, even where no export refunds were paid in respect of a portion of those exports in the relevant marketing year?

| 4. | If Questions 1, 2 or 3 are to be answered in the affirmative: Is Commission Regulation (EC) No 1775/2004 (4) of 14 October 2004 setting the production levies in the sugar sector for the 2003/04 marketing year invalid? |
| --- | --- |

4.

If Questions 1, 2 or 3 are to be answered in the affirmative: Is Commission Regulation (EC) No 1775/2004 (4) of 14 October 2004 setting the production levies in the sugar sector for the 2003/04 marketing year invalid?

4

---

(1)  OJ L 178, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ L 50, p 40.

2

(3)  OJ L 160, p. 33.

3

(4)  OJ L 316, p 64.

4

---