WRITTEN QUESTION E-0846/01 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. The serving of shark products in Commission restaurants.
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, catering, fish product, fishery resources

C 261 E/208

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

Failure on the part of the responsible authorities of the Member State concerned to take the law and order
measures necessary to put an end to a situation of this kind has already led the Commission to initiate
infringement proceedings, and the Court of Justice to rule in its judgment of 9 December 1997 in Case
C-265/95 Commission v. France that (cid:145)by failing to adopt all necessary and proportionate measures in order
to prevent the free movement of fruit and vegetables from being obstructed by actions by private
individuals, the French Government has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 30 (now Article 28),
in conjunction with Article 5 (now Article 10), of the Treaty and under the common organisations of the
markets in agricultural products(cid:146) (ECR I-6959).

In the case in point, it seems however that the considerations which led the Court of Justice to the finding
that France had not taken (cid:145)all necessary and proportionate measures(cid:146), such as the length of time during
which the incidents occurred and their frequency, are not easily applicable to an isolated and unforeseeable
incident such as the interception of the two lorries belonging to (cid:145)Biurrun L.S.(cid:146).

In these circumstances, the case law of the Court of Justice by which it recognised that the principle of the
liability of the Member State for damage caused to private individuals by breaches of Community law
which are ascribable to it is inherent in the Treaty system (see judgment of 19 November 1991, Cases
C-6/90 and C-9/90, Francovich, ECR I-5357 and judgment of 5 March 1996, Joined Cases C-46/93 and
C-48/93, Brasserie du PŒcheur and Factortame III, ECR I-1029) appears difficult to apply to the situation
evoked in Complaint No 2000/4241.

The facts alluded to in Complaint No 2000/4241 date back to 1998, and the Commission is not aware of
a repetition of such incidents which would tend to show laxness on the part of the Portuguese authorities
in implementing proportionate measures to prevent private individuals from committing acts which
impede the free movement of goods. Nevertheless, the Commission has asked the Portuguese authorities
what steps they have taken to deal in the future with this type of situation, taking account in particular of
the obligations incumbent on them under Council Regulation (EC) No 2679/98 of 7 December 1998 on
the functioning of the internal market in relation to the free movement of goods among the Member
States (1).

(1) OJ L 337, 12.12.1998.

(2001/C 261 E/236)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0846/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 March 2001)

Subject: The serving of shark products in Commission restaurants

In view of concerns about the depletion of shark stocks, will the Commission make a commitment to
ensure that shark-fin soup and other shark products are not served in any of the Commission(cid:146)s restaurants
or at official functions?

A commitment has been made by the Quaestors of the European Parliament to ban shark from the
Parliament(cid:146)s restaurants.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2001)

The Commission can confirm that it will not serve shark fin soup or other shark products in any of its
restaurants or at any official functions.