61979CJ0803_EN
Parties
Subject of the case
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part
Parties
IN CASE 803/79
REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE EXAMINING MAGISTRATE AT THE TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE ( COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ), PARIS, FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT AGAINST
GERARD ROUDOLFF
Subject of the case
ON THE INTERPRETATION OF REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010, 2243, 2538, 2645, 2943, 3084 AND 3205/74 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 209, P . 34 ; L 238, P . 31 ; L 271, P . 52 ; L 283, P . 18 ; L 311, P . 38 ; L 327, P . 7 ; AND L 341,
P . 38 ) AND NOS 180, 494 AND 735/75 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 20, P . 11 ; L 53, P . 39 ; AND L 73, P . 29 ) FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER CUTS OF FROZEN, BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS, THIN FLANKS AND SHINS, WHEN NOT PACKED SEPARATELY, QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS,
Grounds
1 BY AN ORDER OF 7 NOVEMBER 1979 WHICH WAS RECEIVED AT THE COURT ON THE 12TH OF THAT MONTH, THE EXAMINING MAGISTRATE AT THE TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE, PARIS, REFERRED TO THE COURT FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY A QUESTION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF SUBHEADING EX 02.01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22, APPEARING IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL FOR THE PERIOD FROM AUGUST 1974 TO APRIL 1975 .
2 THE QUESTION AROSE IN THE COURSE OF A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION CONCERNING THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR OF A FRENCH COMPANY, CHARGED WITH HAVING MADE FALSE DECLARATIONS DURING THE ABOVE-MENTIONED PERIOD IN ORDER TO OBTAIN EXPORT REFUNDS FOR FROZEN, BONED OR BONELESS BEEF AND VEAL EXPORTED TO GREECE . THE CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES ASCERTAINED THAT THE EXPORTED MEAT INCLUDED THE INSIDES OF CHEEKS, SHIN AND THIN FLANKS, WHICH IN ITS OPINION DID NOT QUALIFY FOR REFUNDS UNDER THE ABOVE-MENTIONED REGULATIONS .
3 THE ACCUSED IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS CHALLENGES THAT INTERPRETATION . HE MAINTAINS THAT THE PRODUCTS IN QUESTION WOULD ONLY HAVE FAILED TO QUALIFY FOR THE REFUNDS IF THEY HAD BEEN PACKAGED SEPARATELY .
4 THE QUESTION ASKED BY THE COURT MAKING THE REFERENCE IS WHETHER THE WORDING OF SUBHEADING EX 02.01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010, 2243, 2538, 2645, 2943, 3084 AND 3205/74 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 209, P . 34 ; L 238, P . 31 ; L 271, P . 52 ; L 283, P . 18 ; L 311, P . 38 ; L 327, P . 7 ; AND L 341, P . 38 ) AND NOS 180, 494 AND 735/75 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 20, P . 11 ; L 53, P . 39 ; AND L 73, P . 29 ) FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL MAY BE REGARDED AS COVERING EXPORTS IN CARDBOARD BOXES OF CUTS OF FOREQUARTERS OF FROZEN, BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL, INCLUDING CERTAIN CUTS SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS, THIN FLANKS AND SHIN, WHEN THE LATTER WERE NOT PACKAGED SEPARATELY, AND WHETHER THEY THEREFORE QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS .
5 DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION IN THE PRESENT CASE THERE WERE TWO VERSIONS OF THE DISPUTED SUBHEADING, THE FIRST, WHICH APPEARED IN REGULATIONS NOS 2010 AND 2243/74, BEING WORDED IN THE SIX LANGUAGES OF THE COMMUNITIES AS FOLLOWS :
' ' . . .
MORCEAUX DESOSSES, A L ' EXCEPTION DES JOUES, DES ABATS, DU FLANCHET ET DU JARRET, EMBALLES SEPAREMENT : ' '
' ' . . .
PEZZI DISOSSATI, ESCLUSI LE GUANCE, LE FRATTAGLIE, LA PANCIA, LA TIBIA E IL MUSCOLO ADERENTE, CONFEZIONATI SEPARATAMENTE . ' '
' ' . . .
DELEN, ZONDER BEEN, MET UITZONDERING VAN KOPVLESS, SLACHTAFVALLEN, DE WANG ON DE SCHENKEL, AFZONDERLIJK VERPAKT . ' '
' ' . . .
TEILSTUCKE OHNE KNOCHEN, MIT AUSNAHME VON KOPFFLEISCH, SCHLACHTABFALLEN FLEISCH- UND KNOCHENDUNNUNG UND DIE HESSE, GETRENNT VERPACKT . ' '
' ' . . .
BONED OR BONELESS, EXCLUDING THE CHAPS, THE OFFALS, THE THIN FLANKS AND THE SHIN, PACKAGED SEPARATELY . ' '
' ' . . .
UDBENET MED UNDTAGELSE AF KAEBER, SLAGTEAFFALD, SLAG OG SKANK, STYKKERNE EMBALLERET HVER FOR SIG ' ' .
6 IN A SECOND VERSION, REGULATIONS NOS 2538, 2645, 2943, 3084 AND 3205/74 AND NOS 180, 494 AND 734/75 INCORPORATED THE SAME MODIFICATION IN ALL THE LANGUAGE VERSIONS . IT READS ( IN FRENCH ) AS FOLLOWS :
' ' . . .
MORCEAUX DESOSSES :
- A L ' EXCEPTION DES JOUES ET DES ABATS POUR LES EXPORTATIONS A DESTINATION DES ETATS-UNIS
- A L ' EXCEPTION DES JOUES, DES ABATS, DU FLANCHET ET DU JARRET, EMBALLES SEPAREMENT, . . . ' '
7 FROM A LINGUISTIC POINT OF VIEW THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE WORDS ' ' EMBALLES SEPAREMENT ' '
( PACKAGED SEPARATELY ) REFER TO ' ' MORCEAUX DESOSSES ' '
( BONED OR
BONELESS CUTS ) OR WHETHER THEY REFER ON THE CONTRARY TO THE EXCEPTION MADE FOR ' ' LES JOUES, LES ABATS, LE FLANCHET ET LE JARRET ' '
( THE CHAPS,
THE OFFALS, THE THIN FLANKS AND THE SHIN ). ALTHOUGH IN THE DIFFERENT VERSIONS THERE ARE GRAMMATICAL INDICATIONS, PARTICULARLY THE PUNCTUATION, WHICH SEEM TO SUPPORT THE FORMER INTERPRETATION, THE TEXT WHEN READ AS A WHOLE REMAINS AMBIGUOUS . THE FUNCTION OF THE WORDS IN QUESTION MUST THEREFORE BE EXAMINED IN THE LIGHT OF THE INTENTION AND PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS IN QUESTION .
8 IN THAT CONTEXT THE COMMISSION CLAIMS IN ITS OBSERVATIONS THAT THE COMMUNITY REGULATIONS RESTRICT THE GRANTING OF REFUNDS TO QUALITY CUTS OF MEAT . THESE DO NOT INCLUDE CHEEKS, OFFALS, THIN FLANKS AND SHIN, WHICH ARE USED FOR PROCESSING AND FOR WHICH AS SUCH THERE ARE IN ANY CASE MANY USES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ITSELF . ON THAT GROUND THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR GRANTING EXPORT REFUNDS . MOREOVER, AS THE BONED OR BONELESS CUTS ARE SMALL AND PRACTICALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM EACH OTHER AFTER FREEZING, IT IS NECESSARY FOR EACH PIECE TO BE PACKAGED SEPARATELY IN ORDER TO ENABLE THEM TO BE INSPECTED .
9 THE COURT IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE COMMISSION HAS DEMONSTRATED SUFFICIENTLY THE REASON FOR THE REQUIREMENT CONCERNING SEPARATE PACKAGING : IT IS INTENDED TO FACILITATE INSPECTION AND MUST THEREFORE APPLY TO ALL CUTS WHICH QUALIFY FOR REFUNDS . THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS VIEW IS ALL THE MORE APPARENT IN SO FAR AS THE INTERPRETATION, WHEREBY THE WORDS ' ' EMBALLES SEPAREMENT ' '
REFER TO THE EXCEPTION, DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUCH AS TO GIVE THOSE WORDS ANY REAL PURPOSE . IT WOULD MEAN THAT CHEEKS, OFFALS, THIN FLANKS AND SHIN WOULD QUALIFY FOR REFUNDS WHEN THE PRESENCE OF SUCH CUTS IS CONCEALED, BUT THAT THEY WOULD FAIL SO TO QUALIFY WHEN THEIR PRESENCE IS EASY TO ESTABLISH, SOMETHING WHICH IS HARDLY IN THE INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY .
10 THE REPLY TO THE QUESTION WHICH HAS BEEN ASKED SHOULD THEREFORE BE THAT THE WORDING OF SUBHEADING EX 02.01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010, 2243, 2538, 2645, 2943, 3084 / AND 3205/74 AND NOS 180, 494 AND 735/75, FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL COULD NOT BE REGARDED AS COVERING EXPORTS OF CUTS OF FOREQUARTERS OF FROZEN, BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL, SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS, THIN FLANKS AND SHIN, OR AS ENABLING THEM TO QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS .
Decision on costs
11 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, WHICH HAS SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT, ARE NOT RECOVERABLE ; AS THE PROCEEDINGS ARE, IN SO FAR AS THE ACCUSED IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS IS CONCERNED, A STEP IN THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE NATIONAL COURT, THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT .
Operative part
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
THE COURT ( SECOND CHAMBER )
IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO IT BY THE EXAMINING MAGISTRATE AT THE TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE, PARIS, BY AN ORDER OF 7 NOVEMBER 1979, HEREBY RULES :
THE WORDING OF SUBHEADING EX 02.01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010, 2243, 2538, 2645, 2943, 3084 AND 3205/74 AND NOS 180, 494 AND 735/75 FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL COULD NOT BE REGARDED AS COVERING EXPORTS OF CUTS OF FOREQUARTERS OF FROZEN, BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL, SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS, THIN FLANKS AND SHIN, OR AS ENABLING THEM TO QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS .