Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 30 November 2000 in Case C-422/99: Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement Directive 97/51/EC)
Date: 2001-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, competition, harmonisation of standards, telecommunications

C 79/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.3.2001

for the grant of private storage aid fixed at a standard rate in
advance in respect of carcases, half-carcases, hindquarters and
forequarters from adult male bovine animals (OJ 1988 L 239,
p. 20), as amended by Commission Regulation (EEC) No
3258/88 of 21 October 1988 (OJ 1988 L 289, p. 52) — the
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola, President
of the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward and L. Sevo´ n (Rapporteur),
Judges; G. Cosmas, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
30 November 2000, in which it has ruled:

1. On a proper construction of Article 1 of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 1964/82 of 20 July 1982 laying down the
conditions for granting special export refunds on certain cuts of
boned meat of bovine animals, as amended by Commission
Regulation (EEC) No 3169/87 of 23 October 1987 amending
Regulations (EEC) No 32/82, (EEC) No 1964/82 and (EEC)
No 74/84 in the matter of customs export formalities for
certain beef on which special refunds are granted, every piece of
meat had to be individually wrapped, whatever its size, weight
and nature, and without distinguishing, in particular, between
scraps and trimmings.

2. On a proper construction of Articles 7 and 8 of the same
regulation, the Member States had the right to exclude from
entitlement to special export refunds trimmings whose weight
was below a certain limit, such as a limit of 100 grams.

3. On a proper construction of Article 4(4) of Commission
Regulation (EEC) No 2675/88 of 29 August 1988 providing
for the grant of private storage aid fixed at a standard rate in
advance in respect of carcases, half-carcases, hindquarters and
forequarters from adult male bovine animals, as amended by
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3258/88 of 21 October
1988, trimmings left over from cutting or boning, whatever
their weight, did not qualify for private storage aid under
contracts entered into pursuant to that regulation.

the application of

4. On a proper construction of Regulation No 1964/82, of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 565/80 of 4 March 1980 on
the advance payment of export refunds in respect of agricultural
products, as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No
2026/83 of 18 July 1983, and of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down
common detailed rules for
the system
of export refunds on agricultural products, as amended by
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3494/88 of 9 November
1988 and Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3993/88 of
21 December 1988, where the competent authority establishes
that a carton of meat subject
to the scheme covered by
Regulation No 1964/82 contains items prohibited by the
legislation, whether trimmings rolled up within other pieces of
meat, separate pieces of fat rolled up within pieces of meat, or
non-individually wrapped pieces of meat, those regulations
permit it to hold that the entire contents of the carton do not
qualify for special export refunds and to forfeit the security given
for the advance payment made in respect of that carton plus
20 %.

5. On a proper construction of Regulation No 2675/88, of
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1091/80 of 2 May 1980
laying down detailed rules for granting private storage aid for
beef and veal and of Commission Regulation (EEC) No
2220/85 of 22 July 1985 laying down common detailed rules
for the application of the system of securities for agricultural
products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EEC)
No 1181/87 of 29 April 1987, where the competent authority
establishes that a carton of meat subject to the scheme covered
by Regulation No 2675/88 contains items prohibited by
Article 4(4) thereof, such as trimmings or separate pieces of fat
rolled up within pieces of meat, those regulations permit it to
hold that the entire contents of the carton do not qualify for
private storage aid and to forfeit the security given for the
advance payment made in respect of that carton plus 20 %.

6. On a proper construction of the Community regulations, where
checks relating to cartons of meat reveal evidence in particular
production plants of a deliberate and persistent policy of
infringement of Regulations No 1964/82 and No 2675/88,
the competent authority may extrapolate the results of those
checks across the production of
the production plants in
question.

7. Where the sampling checks have revealed evidence of a deliberate
and persistent policy of storing material which does not qualify
for the private storage aid scheme by virtue of Article 4(4) of
Regulation No 2675/88, the competent authority is permitted
to refuse to grant private storage aid and to forfeit the security
in its entirety, pursuant
to Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation
No 1091/80, in respect of the whole of the material to which
it has extrapolated the results of the check.

(1) OJ C 48 of 20.2.1999.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 30 November 2000

in Case C-422/99: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Italian Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure
to implement Directive 97/51/EC)

(2001/C 79/07)

(Language of the case: Italian)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-422/99: Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: C. Schmidt and G. Bisogni) v Italian Republic (Agent:
Professor U. Leanza, assisted by I.M. Braguglia) — application
for a declaration that, by failing to adopt or, in any event, by

10.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 79/5

failing to communicate to the Commission the laws, regu-
lations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Directive 97/51/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 6 October 1997 amending Council Directives
90/387/EEC and 92/44/EEC for the purpose of adaptation to
a competitive environment in telecommunications (OJ 1997
L 295, p. 23), the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil
its
obligations under that directive — the Court (Third Chamber),
composed of: C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), President of the
Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet and F. Macken, Judges; S. Alber,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 30 November 2000, in which it:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period,
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply with Directive 97/51/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 6 October 1997 amending Council
Directives 90/387/EEC and 92/44/EEC for the purpose of
adaptation to a competitive environment in telecommunications,
the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
that directive;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 20 of 22.1.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 5 December 2000

in Case C-448/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling
from the Tribunal de Police, Belley, France): criminal
proceedings against Jean-Pierre Guimont (1)

(Measures having equivalent effect to a quantitative restric-
tion — Purely internal situation — Manufacture and
marketing of Emmenthal cheese without rind)

(2001/C 79/08)

(Language of the case: French)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-448/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Tribunal de
Police (Local Criminal Court), Belley, (France) for a preliminary
ruling in the criminal proceedings before that court against
Jean-Pierre Guimont — on the interpretation of Articles 3(a)
and 30 et seq. of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
Articles 3(1)(a) EC and 28 EC et seq.) — the Court, composed
of: G.C. Rodrı´guez Iglesias, President, C. Gulmann (Rappor-
teur), M. Wathelet and V. Skouris (Presidents of Chambers),

J.-P. Puissochet, P.

D.A.O. Edward,
Jann, L. Sevo´ n and
R. Schintgen, Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate General; H. von
Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 5 December 2000, in which it has ruled:

Article 30 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 28 EC)
precludes a Member State from applying to products imported from
another Member State, where they are lawfully produced and
marketed, a national rule prohibiting the marketing of a cheese
without rind under the designation ‘Emmenthal’ in that Member
State.

(1) OJ C 33 of 6.2.1999.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 5 December 2000

in Case C-477/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland): Eurostock Meat
Marketing Ltd v Department of Agriculture for Northern
Ireland (1)

(Agriculture — Animal health — National emergency
measures against bovine spongiform encephalopathy —
Specified risk material)

(2001/C 79/09)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-477/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Court of Appeal
in Northern Ireland (United Kingdom)
for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Eurostock Meat Marketing Ltd and Department of Agriculture
for Northern Ireland — on the interpretation of Article 9
of Council Directive 89/662/EEC of 11 December 1989
concerning veterinary checks in intra-Community trade with a
view to the completion of the internal market (OJ 1989 L 395,
p. 13), Commission Decision 97/534/EC of 30 July 1997 on
the prohibition of the use of material presenting risks as
regards transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (OJ 1997
L 216, p. 95) and Article 36 of the EC Treaty (now, after
amendment, Article 30 EC) — the Court, composed of:
G.C. Rodrı´guez Iglesias, President, C. Gulmann, A. La Pergola,
M. Wathelet and V. Skouris
(Presidents of Chambers),
D.A.O. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet, P. Jann, L. Sevo´ n (Rapporteur),
Judges; S. Alber, Advocate
R. Schintgen and F. Macken,
General; L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given
a judgment on 5 December 2000, in which it has ruled: