Order — ECLI:EU:C:2007:662
Date: 2007-11-08
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Animal feedingstuffs
Concepts: Public health;General
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Italy

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 16 October 2006 - Fratelli Martini & C. s.p.a, Cargill s.r.l. v Ministero delle Politiche Agricole e Forestali, Ministero della Salute, Ministero delle Attività Produttive (Case C-421/06) Language of the case: Italian Referring court Consiglio di Stato Parties to the main proceedings Applicants: Fratelli Martini & C. s.p.a, Cargill s.r.l. Defendants: Ministero delle Politiche Agricole e Forestali, Ministero della Salute, Ministero delle Attività Produttive, Questions referred Following the judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 December 2005 in Joined Cases 453/03, 11/04, 12/04 and 194/04, which declared Directive 2002/2 1 partially invalid, are the European institutions which adopted that Directive, having regard to Article 233 of the EC Treaty (referring to acts which have been declared void) 'required to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court of Justice'? If the answer to question (1) is in the affirmative, must the measures which the European institutions are required to adopt in order to bring Directive 2002/2 into conformity with that judgment of the Court of Justice enter into force first in the Community legal order, to enable the Member States to implement them in their own legal systems? Must the measures referred to in question (2) be adopted by the Community institutions and implemented by the Member States in a manner which ensures compliance with the subsequently adopted Regulation No 183/2005? 2 Must Regulation No 183/2005, read together with Articles 8 and 16 of Regulation No 178/2002, 3 be interpreted as prohibiting producers of feedingstuffs from affixing to their products labels which could mislead consumers? Are labels affixed to feedingstuffs to be regarded as misleading for consumers where the percentages of the various ingredients, as indicated on those labels, may intentionally be set by the producers at levels which deviate by 15% in each case from the actual percentage? ____________ 1 - OJ L 63, p. 23. 2 - OJ L 35, p. 1. 3 - OJ L 31, p. 1.