Cases C-483/00, C-485/00 to C-488/00, C-492/00 to C-494/00, C-496/00, C-500/00 and C-21/01: References for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio by orders of that court of 6 July 2000 in the cases of Azienda Agricola Nardoni di Benedetto Nardoni v Azienda di Stato per gli Interventi nel Mercato Agricolo (AIMA) and the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (Case C-483/00); Azienda Agricola Antonio Tonon v AIMA, the other party being the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-485/00); Azienda Agricola Beniamino Brutti, by Mario Zanetti and Others v AIMA, the other party being the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (Case C-486/00), also Cooperativa Agricola Latte 2001 and Others; Cooperativa Nuova Latte s.r.l. v AIMA and the Ministry of Agricultural and Forestry Policy (C-487/00); Azienda Agricola Fermo and Gabriele Borini (C-488/00); Giuseppe de Marchi and Others (C-492/00); Ferdinando Pavan and Others v AIMA and the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-493/00); Associazione dei Produttori di Latte delle Terre del Granducato ed altre Aziende v AIMA and the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning and the Regione Toscana (Case C-494/00); Associazione Agricola Produttori Castellani s.c.a.r.l. and Others v AIMA and the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-496/00); Aziende Agricole Pietro Baita and Others v AIMA and the Ministry of Agricultural and Forestry Policy (C-500/00), and Giorgio Accarini and Others v AIMA and the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-21/01)
Date: 2001-04-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural levy, derogation from EU law, interpretation of the law, milk, milk product, production quota

C 118/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.4.2001

before that court between Masterfoods Ltd and HB Ice Cream
Ltd and between HB Ice Cream Ltd and Masterfoods Ltd,
trading as ‘Mars Ireland’ — on the interpretation of Articles 85,
86 and 222 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 81 EC, 82 EC and
295 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), R. Schintgen
Cosmas, Advocate General;
and F. Macken,
L. Hewlett, Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 14 December 2000, in which it has ruled:

Judges; G.

Ferdinando Pavan and Others v AIMA and the Ministry
of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-493/00);
Associazione dei Produttori di Latte delle Terre del
Granducato ed altre Aziende v AIMA and the Ministry of
the Treasury, the Budget and Planning and the Regione
Toscana (Case C-494/00); Associazione Agricola Produtto-
ri Castellani s.c.a.r.l. and Others v AIMA and the Ministry
of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-496/00);
Aziende Agricole Pietro Baita and Others v AIMA and
the Ministry of Agricultural
and Forestry Policy
(C-500/00), and Giorgio Accarini and Others v AIMA and
the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning
(C-21/01)

Where a national court is ruling on an agreement or practice the
compatibility of which with Articles 85(1) and 86 of the EC Treaty
(now Articles 81(1) EC and Article 82 EC) is already the subject of
a Commission decision, it cannot take a decision running counter to
that of the Commission, even if the latter’s decision conflicts with a
decision given by a national court of first instance. If the addressee of
the Commission decision has, within the period prescribed in the fifth
paragraph of Article 173 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
the fifth paragraph of Article 230 EC), brought an action for
annulment of that decision, it is for the national court to decide
whether to stay proceedings pending final judgment in that action for
annulment or in order to refer a question to the Court
for a
preliminary ruling.

(1) OJ C 378 of 5.12.1998.

References for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale
Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio by orders of that
court of 6 July 2000 in the cases of Azienda Agricola
Nardoni di Benedetto Nardoni v Azienda di Stato per gli
Interventi nel Mercato Agricolo (AIMA) and the Ministry
of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (Case C-483/00);
Azienda Agricola Antonio Tonon v AIMA, the other
party being the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and
Planning (C-485/00); Azienda Agricola Beniamino Brutti,
by Mario Zanetti and Others v AIMA, the other party
being the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and
Planning (Case C-486/00), also Cooperativa Agricola Latte
2001 and Others; Cooperativa Nuova Latte s.r.l. v AIMA
and the Ministry of Agricultural and Forestry Policy
(C-487/00); Azienda Agricola Fermo and Gabriele Borini
(C-488/00); Giuseppe de Marchi and Others (C-492/00);

(Cases C-483/00, C-485/00 to C-488/00, C-492/00 to
C-494/00, C-496/00, C-500/00 and C-21/01)

(2001/C 118/12)

References have been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by orders of 6 July 2000 of the
Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio, received at
the Court Registry on 29 December 2000, for a preliminary
ruling in the cases of Azienda Agricola Nardoni di Benedetto
Nardoni v Azienda di Stato per gli Interventi nel Mercato
Agricolo (AIMA) and the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget
and Planning (Case C-483/00); Azienda Agricola Antonio
the other party being the Ministry of
Tonon v AIMA,
the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-485/00); Azienda
Agricola Beniamino Brutti, by Mario Zanetti and Others v
AIMA, the other party being the Ministry of the Treasury,
the Budget and Planning (Case C-486/00), also Cooperativa
Agricola Latte 2001 and Others; Cooperativa Nuova Latte s.r.l.
v AIMA and the Ministry of Agricultural and Forestry Policy
(C-487/00); Azienda Agricola Fermo and Gabriele Borini
(C-488/00); Giuseppe de Marchi and Others (C-492/00);
Ferdinando Pavan and Others v AIMA and the Ministry of the
Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-493/00); Associazione
dei Produttori di Latte delle Terre del Granducato ed altre
Aziende v AIMA and the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget
and Planning and the Regione Toscana (Case C-494/00);
Associazione Agricola Produttori Castellani s.c.a.r.l. and Others
v AIMA and the Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and
Planning (C-496/00); Aziende Agricole Pietro Baita and Others
v AIMA and the Ministry of Agricultural and Forestry Policy
(C-500/00), and Giorgio Accarini and Others v AIMA and the
Ministry of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning (C-21/01)
on the following questions:

21.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 118/9

(1) May the provisions contained in Articles 1 and 4 of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 (1) of 28 December
1992 and Articles 3 and 4 of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 534/93 (2) of 9 March 1993 be interpreted as
meaning that it is possible, in cases of administrative or
judicial challenge to the relevant measures, to derogate
from the time-limits prescribed for the allocation of
quotas and the operation of adjustments and levies?

If not:

(2) Are the provisions contained in Articles 1 and 4 of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 of 28 December
1992 and Articles 3 and 4 of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 534/93 of 9 March 1993 valid, in the light of
Article 33 (ex 39) of the Treaty, in so far as they do not
provide that derogations may be made from the periods
prescribed by those provisions for the allocation of
individual reference quantities, for adjustments and levies
in cases of administrative or judicial challenge to those
provisions?

(1) OJ L 405 of 31.12.1992, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 57 of 10.3.1993, p. 12.

If not:

(2) Are the provisions contained in Articles 1 and 4 of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 of 28 December
1992 and Articles 3 and 4 of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 534/93 of 9 March 1993 valid, in the light of
Article 33 (ex 39) of the Treaty, in so far as they do not
provide that derogations may be made from the periods
prescribed by those provisions for the allocation of
individual reference quantities, for adjustments and levies
in cases of administrative or judicial challenge to those
provisions?

(3) May Regulations No 3950/92 and 536/93 be interpreted
as meaning that the individual reference quantity need
not necessarily be notified separately to each producer,
but may be communicated in other ways such as the
publication of notices?

(1) OJ L 405 of 31.12.1992, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 57 of 10.3.1993, p. 12.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale
Amministrativo Regionale per il. Lazio by judgment of
that court of 6 July 2000 in the case of Carlo Balestreri
against Azienda di Stato per gli Interventi nel Mercato
Agricolo (AIMA) and the Ministry of the Treasury, the
Budget and Planning, the other party being Parmalat SpA

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale
Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio by order of that
court of 6 July 2000 in the case of Aziende Agricole
Visentin and Others v Azienda di Stato per gli Interventi
nel Mercato Agricolo (AIMA), the other parties to the
proceedings being Ind. Caseificio Silvio Belladelli & Figli
and Others

(Case C-484/00)

(2001/C 118/13)

(Case C-495/00)

(2001/C 118/14)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of 6 July 2000 of the
Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio, received at
the Court Registry on 29 December 2000, for a preliminary
ruling in the case of Carlo Balestreri against Azienda di Stato
per gli Interventi nel Mercato Agricolo (AIMA) and the Ministry
of the Treasury, the Budget and Planning, the other party being
Parmalat SpA, on the following questions:

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of 6 July 2000 of the
Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio, received at
the Court Registry on 29 December 2000, for a preliminary
ruling in the case of Aziende Agricole Visentin and Others v
Azienda di Stato per gli
Interventi nel Mercato Agricolo
the other parties to the proceedings being Ind.
(AIMA),
Caseificio Silvio Belladelli & Figli and Others on the following
questions:

(1) May the provisions contained in Articles 1 and 4 of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 (1) of 28 December
1992 and Articles 3 and 4 of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 534/93 (2) of 9 March 1993 be interpreted as
meaning that it is possible, in cases of administrative or
judicial challenge to the relevant measures, to derogate
from the time-limits prescribed for the allocation of
quotas and the operation of adjustments and levies?

(1) May the provisions contained in Articles 1 and 4 of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 (1) of 28 December
P92 and Articles 3 and 4 of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 534/93 (2) of 9 March 1993 be interpreted as
meaning that it is possible, in cases of administrative or
judicial challenge to the relevant measures, to derogate
from the time-limits prescribed for the allocation of
quotas and the operation of adjustments and levies?