Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2004:108
Date: 2004-02-19
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Sugar
Concepts: Import and export licences and advance-fixing certificates;Exports
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: United Kingdom

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Sugar — Production in 
excess of the quota (C sugar) — Export licence stating a quantity of sugar lower 
I - 1899 
SUMMARY — CASE C-329/01 
than that actually exported or having expired — Proof of export — None — Licence 
extract endorsed by customs authorities — No effect 
(Commission Regulation No 2670/81, Art. 2(2)(a)) 
2. Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Import and export 
licences — Correction by the competent authorities of statement made in the licence 
or an extract therefrom — No inaccuracy in those documents — Not permissible 
(Commission Regulation No 3719/88, Art. 24(2)) 
3. Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Import and export 
licences — Correction by the competent authorities — Breach of the principle of 
proportionality — None — Interference with protected interests — None 
(Commission Regulation No 3719/88, Art. 24(2)) 
4. Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Sugar — Production in 
excess of the quota (C sugar) — Alteration of the charge to be paid — Discretion 
of the national court or the competent authorities — No evidence of wrongful 
conduct — None 
(Commission Regulation No 2670/81, Art. 3) 
5. Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Sugar — Production in 
excess of the quota (C sugar) — Export carried out after the expiry of the export 
licence — Obligation to pay the charge due in respect of sugar disposed of on the 
internal market 
(Commission Regulation No 2670/81, Art. 3) 
1. T h e p r o o f p r o v i d e d f o r in 
A r t i c l e 2 ( 2 ) ( a ) of R e g u l a t i o n 
N o 2670/81 laying down detailed 
implementing rules in respect of sugar 
production in excess of the quota, as 
amended by Regulation No 158/96, 
has not been supplied in respect of a 
quantity of C sugar actually exported 
where that quantity exceeds the total 
quantity stated on the export licence or 
where the export takes place after the 
period of that licence's validity has 
expired. The fact that the C sugar 
concerned did actually leave the Com­
munity's customs territory is not con­
clusive in that respect. The same is true 
where the customs authorities have 
endorsed the licence extract for a 
quantity applied for, but which does 
not reflect the manufacturer 's real 
intentions having regard to a customs 
declaration in a corrected form cor­
responding to the amount actually 
exported. 
(see paras 49, 50, 52, operative part 1) 
I - 1900 
BRITISH SUGAR 
2. On a proper construction of Article 24 
of Regulation No 3719/88 laying down 
common detailed rules for the appli­
cation of the system of import and 
export licences and advance-fixing cer­
tificates for agricultural products, as 
amended by Regulation No 1199/95, 
the competent authority is not per­
mitted to carry out a correction of the 
tonnage stated on the export licence or 
extract therefrom where there is no 
inaccuracy in the entries made in those 
documents themselves. 
(see para. 56, operative part 2) 
3. Examination of Article 24 of Regu­
lation No 3719/88, laying down com­
mon detailed rules for the application 
of the system of import and export 
licences and advance fixing certificates 
for agricultural products, as amended 
by Regulation No 1199/95, has dis­
closed nothing which might affect its 
validity. In order to establish whether a 
provision of Community law complies 
with the principle of proportionality, it 
must be ascertained whether the means 
which it employs are suitable for the 
purpose of achieving the desired objec­
tive and whether they do not go beyond 
what is necessary to achieve it. It 
cannot be maintained that rules which 
do not themselves interfere with pro­
tected interests are capable of infring­
ing the principle of proportionality. 
The sole purpose of Article 24(2), as 
is made clear by the 17th recital in the 
preamble to that regulation, is to allow 
errors attributable to the issuing agency 
or to obvious inaccuracies to be cor­
rected. Such a provision does not give 
rise to any interference with the manu­
facturers' interests and it cannot, there­
fore, constitute a breach of the prin­
ciple of proportionality. 
(see paras 58-60, 63, operative part 3) 
4. Where there is no evidence of wrongful 
conduct on the part of the national 
authorities, their refusal to correct 
licence extracts where there is no 
inaccuracy in the entries made in those 
documents cannot permit either the 
national court or the competent auth­
ority to enjoy any discretion to vary 
downwards the charge to be paid 
pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation 
N o 2670/81 laying down detailed 
implementing rules in respect of sugar 
production in excess of the quota, as 
amended by Regulation No 158/96. 
(see paras 66, 67, operative part 4) 
I - 1901 
SUMMARY — CASE C-329/01 
5. Article 3 of Regulation No 2670/81, 
laying down detailed implementing 
rules in respect of sugar production in 
excess of the quota, as amended by 
Regulation No 158/96, is to be inter­
preted as applying to an export of C 
sugar effected after the corresponding 
export licence has expired, if the export 
was made after the expiry of the 
corresponding export licence. 
(see para. 73, operative part 5) 
I - 1902