# C_2005069EN.01000501.xml

| 19.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/5

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Cassation, Commercial, Financial and Economic Division, France by order of that court of 14 December 2004 in the case of Laboratoires Boiron S.A. against Agence centrale des organismes de sécurité sociale (Central Agency for Social Security Bodies)

(Case C-526/04)

(2005/C 69/11)

Language of the case: French

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Court of Cassation, Commercial, Financial and Economic Division, France, of 14 December 2004, received at the Court Registry on 29 December 2004 for a preliminary ruling in the case of Laboratoires Boiron S.A. against Agence centrale des organismes de sécurité sociale on the following questions:

Laboratoires Boiron S.A.

Agence centrale des organismes de sécurité sociale

| 1. | Must Community law be interpreted as meaning that a pharmaceutical laboratory liable to pay a contribution such as that under Article 12 of Law No 97-1164 of 19 December 1997 on social security funding for 1998 is, in order to obtain its repayment, entitled to plead that the fact that wholesale distributors are not liable for that contribution constitutes State aid? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Community law be interpreted as meaning that a pharmaceutical laboratory liable to pay a contribution such as that under Article 12 of Law No 97-1164 of 19 December 1997 on social security funding for 1998 is, in order to obtain its repayment, entitled to plead that the fact that wholesale distributors are not liable for that contribution constitutes State aid?

| 2. | If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative and since the success of the claim for repayment may depend solely on evidence produced by the claimant, must Community law be interpreted as meaning that rules of national law, which make that repayment subject to proof by the claimant that the advantage received by the wholesale distributors exceeds the costs which they bear in discharging the public service obligations imposed on them by the national legislation or that the conditions laid down by the Court of Justice in Altmark are not satisfied, constitute rules of evidence which have the effect of making it practically impossible or excessively difficult to secure repayment of a mandatory contribution, such as that under Article 245-6-1 of the Social Security Code, which has been claimed before the competent authority, on the ground that the exemption from the contribution to which those wholesale distributors are entitled constitutes State aid which has not been notified to the Commission of the European Communities? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative and since the success of the claim for repayment may depend solely on evidence produced by the claimant, must Community law be interpreted as meaning that rules of national law, which make that repayment subject to proof by the claimant that the advantage received by the wholesale distributors exceeds the costs which they bear in discharging the public service obligations imposed on them by the national legislation or that the conditions laid down by the Court of Justice in Altmark are not satisfied, constitute rules of evidence which have the effect of making it practically impossible or excessively difficult to secure repayment of a mandatory contribution, such as that under Article 245-6-1 of the Social Security Code, which has been claimed before the competent authority, on the ground that the exemption from the contribution to which those wholesale distributors are entitled constitutes State aid which has not been notified to the Commission of the European Communities?

Altmark

---