III —

The latter relies on an analysis of the actual wording of the disputed provision, the meaning of which he considers to be clearly that which be suggests. Conversely, for the Commission the same literal analysis leads without a doubt to the view held by it. Confronted with such conflicting evidence I cannot but examine, in my turn, the disputed wording and in doing so take into consideration all the regulations of the Commission adopted during the period covering the exports, which I will look at in their authentic versions in the six languages of the Community, as is required in the case of a provision of Community law. (a) During the period in question there have been two successive versions of the description to be examined. In Regulation No 2010/74 of 30 July 1974 fixing refunds for the period beginning 1 August 1974, and Regulation No 2243/74 of 29 August 1974, the purpose of which is the same for the period beginning 1 September 1974, the description was worded as follows: “Morceaux désossés, à l'exception des joues, des abats, du flanchet et du jarret, emballés séparément: — pour les exportations à destination des Etats-Unis — pour les exportations à destination des pays tiers européens,...” In the other Community languages the description is identical: “Boned or boneless, excluding the chaps, the offals, the thin flanks and the shin, packaged separately”, in English, “Teilstücke ohne Knochen, mit Ausnahme von Kopffleisch, Schlachtabfällen, Fleisch- und Knochendünnung und die Hesse, getrennt verpackt”, in German, “Pezzi disossati, esclusi le guance, le frattaglie, la pancia, la tibia e il muscolo aderente, confezionati separatamente”, in Italian, “Delen, zonder been, met uitzondering van kopvlees, slachtafvallen, de vang en de schenkel, afzonderlijk verpakt”, in Dutch and “Udbenet med undtagelse af kaeber, slagteaffald, slag og skank, stykkerne emballeret hver for sig”, in Danish. Subsequently, for the period from 7 October 1974 to 30 April 1975, which was covered by nine successive texts (Regulations No 2538/74, No 2645/74, No 2943/74, No 3084/74, No 3205/74, No 180/75, No 494/75 and No 735/75), the disputed provision became [in the French language version] : “Morceaux désossés: — à l'exception des joues et des abats pour les exportations à destination des Etats-Unis — à l'exception des joues, des abats, du flanchet et du jarret, emballés séparément, pour les exportations à destination des pays tiers européens,...” It underwent the same alteration in the other language versions. For example, the English text at that time was: “Boned or boneless. — excluding the cheeks ( 2 ) and the offals, for export to the United States of America — excluding the cheeks, ( 2 ) the offals, the thin flanks and the shin, packaged separately, for export to European third countries,...” (b) How are we to judge those texts? In my opinion the French wording does not make it clear in either of the successive versions whether “emballés séparément” relates to “joues, abats, flanchet et jarret” or to “morceaux désossés”. In my view the text is ambiguous, and, to be candid, poorly drafted. According to the information I have collected, the same is true in each of the other languages. The ambiguity is particularly obvious in the German. The Commission may be right in pointing out that Mr Roudolff's view would be the one to adopt if the wording had been: “Teilstücke ohne Knochen, mit Ausnahme von getrennt verpacktem Kopffleisch,...”, but as the text stands its own interpretation is far from certain. It would only have been otherwise if one of the two following expressions had been used: “getrennt verpackte Teilstücke ohne Knochen,...” or “Teilstücke ohne Knochen, getrennt verpackt,...”. The defectiveness of the expression in use between August 1974 and April 1975 also becomes apparent on reading the wording which was used before and after that period. Thus, in Regulation No 1444/74 of 10 June 1974 and Regulation No 1.631/74 of 27 June 1974, which were applicable during the periods immediately prior to that covering the disputed exports, we read: “Morceaux désossés, à l'exception des joues et des abats: — pour les exportations à destination des États-Unis — à l'exception du flanchet et du jarret emballés séparément, pour les exportations à destination des pays tiers européens,...”. From the strictly grammatical point of view it may be inferred from the wording that the absence of a comma between “emballes séparément” and “flanchet et jarret” means that the interpretation put forward by Mr Roudolff is the correct one, in respect in those products. On the other hand, there can be no doubt with the current text, as may be seen in Regulation No 897/80 of 14 April 1980, that irrespective of the way in which they are packed, thin flanks and shin do not qualify for refunds. The actual wording at present is: “Morceaux désossés, a l'exception du flanchet et du jarret, chaque morceau emballé individuellement” [Boned or boneless, excluding the thin flanks and the shin each piece individually wrapped]. Thus a literal interpretation is not sufficient for the Court to give a definite reply to the question which has been asked by the court making the reference.