Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2005:9
Date: 2005-01-13
Language of the case: German
Court formation: First Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Measures having equivalent effect;Quantitative restrictions
Concepts: Food additives
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment Agriculture – Approximation of laws – Additives in animal feedingstuffs – Directive 70/524 – Vitamin content – National legislation prohibiting the marketing of a supplementary feedingstuff manufactured in accordance with the general rule but the vitamin D content of which exceeds that authorised in the Member State concerned – Not permissible (Council Directive 70/524, Arts 12(1) and (2) and 19) Article 12(1) of Directive 70/524 concerning additives in feedingstuffs provides, as a general rule, that supplementary feedingstuffs may not, in view of their specified dilution, contain levels of additives which exceed those fixed for complete feedingstuffs, although the derogation contained in Article 12(2) of that directive authorises Member States, in certain cases, to allow the vitamin D levels of supplementary feedingstuffs to exceed the maximum levels laid down for complete feedingstuffs. Under Article 19 of the directive, Member States are required to ensure that animal feedingstuffs which conform to that directive are subject only to the marketing restrictions provided for therein. In that connection, neither the wording of the first subparagraph of Article 12(2) of the directive nor the contextual elements or purpose of that provision allow it to be established that recourse by a Member State to the possibility of laying down rules made available by that provision authorises that Member State to prohibit the importation of a supplementary feedingstuff which has been placed on the market in another Member State pursuant to Article 12(1) of the directive. It follows that the combined provisions of Articles 12 and 19 of Directive 70/524 must be interpreted as precluding a measure by which a Member State prohibits the marketing within its territory of a supplementary animal feedingstuff, lawfully manufactured in another Member State in accordance with Article 12(1) of that directive, on grounds of its vitamin D content. (see paras 33, 38, operative part)