Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Wine - Compulsory distillation of table wine - Carrying over, for the purpose of calculating the total quantity for a given wine year, of the quantities not distilled during the preceding wine year - Method of calculating the quantity distilled by Italy - Unequal apportionment of the quantity among the various wine-growing regions - Infringement of the prohibition of discrimination and of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations - None

(Council Regulation No 822/87, Art. 39; Commission Regulation No 343/94, Art. 1(3), fourth indent)

2 Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Wine - Compulsory distillation of table wine - Apportionment of the quantities for distillation among the various producers in a region - Application of the criterion of yield per hectare - Breach of the principle of proportionality - None - Assessment not affected by subsequent considerations

(Council Regulation No 822/87, Art. 39(4); Commission Regulation No 465/94)

3 Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Wine - Compulsory distillation of table wine - Apportionment of the quantity for distillation among the various wine-growing regions - Determination of regions by reference to the territories of the Member States - Whether permissible

(Council Regulation No 822/87, Art. 39; Commission Regulation No 441/88)

4 Preliminary rulings - Jurisdiction of the Court - Limits - Manifestly irrelevant questions - Lack of jurisdiction of the Court

(EC Treaty, Art. 177)

Summary

1 In the context of the scheme for the compulsory distillation of table wine introduced by Article 39 of Regulation No 822/87 and, in particular, of the compulsory distillation for the 1993/94 wine year provided for by Regulation No 343/94, it does not constitute discrimination between wine-growers subject to the obligation to distil for account to have been taken, when calculating the total quantity of wine for distillation set for Italy by the fourth indent of Article 1(3) of the latter regulation, of the quantities which, in breach of the law, had not been distilled during the previous wine year and were therefore still on the market. In pursuing the objective of improving conditions in the wine market, in which regard the Commission has a wide discretion, all Community producers, regardless of the Member State in which they are based, must together, in an egalitarian manner, bear the consequences of the decisions which the Community institutions are led to adopt in order to respond to the risk of an imbalance which may arise in the market between production and market outlets. Furthermore, the method of calculating the quantity to be distilled by Italy does not appear to result in its being treated differently compared with the other Member States.

Nor does the carrying over of undistilled quantities from one wine year to the next or the unequal apportionment of the quantity for distillation among the various wine-growing regions thwart the legitimate expectations of Italian wine-growers who fulfilled the obligation to distil in the 1992/93 wine year since, first, economic agents cannot legitimately expect that they will not be subject to restrictions arising out of future rules of market or structural policy and, secondly, the Community itself did not previously create a situation which could give rise to such an expectation.

2 In the context of the scheme for the compulsory distillation of table wine introduced by Article 39 of Regulation No 822/87, the apportionment of the quantities for distillation among the various producers in a region on the basis of yield per hectare, provided for by Article 39(4) of that regulation and implemented in respect of the 1993/94 wine year by Regulation No 465/94, does not contravene the principle of proportionality. That measure, which is designed to impose most of the burden of compulsory distillation on the producers who are principally responsible for the production of surpluses in the market at issue while not penalising producers who achieve low yields, cannot be regarded as disproportionate in relation to the objective pursued which is to absorb those surpluses.

Furthermore, since it was not manifestly incorrect, when the rules were adopted, to take account of the criterion of yield per hectare, the fact that other criteria are envisaged for the future cannot render the initial criterion unlawful retroactively, given that the legality of a Community act cannot depend on retrospective considerations of its efficacy.

3 In the context of the scheme for the compulsory distillation of table wine introduced by Article 39 of Regulation No 822/87 and of the measures adopted by Regulation No 441/88 amplifying that scheme, the Commission was entitled, in the exercise of its discretion, to equate the territories of the Member States with the wine-growing regions in the Community, in particular to equate Italy with wine-growing zone C. In an entity composed of Member States, such as the European Community, it is clearly reasonable to take the territory of those States as a point of reference for administrative purposes even though geographical and economic conditions may not be identical in the various parts of national territory, provided that such a decision is not manifestly unsuited to the structures of the Member State in question.

4 The Court lacks jurisdiction to answer questions referred for a preliminary ruling where they do not involve an interpretation of Community law objectively required for the decision to be taken by the national court. That is the case when the provision whose validity is the subject-matter of the reference manifestly has no bearing on the outcome of the main proceedings.