Case C-2/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsgericht Mainz by order of 10 December 2001 in the case of Emil Färber GmbH & Co. KG against Landkreis Alzey-Worms
Date: 2002-03-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: financing method, health control, interpretation of the law, meat processing industry, veterinary inspection

16.3.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 68/5

The Commission concludes that the spirit and purpose of
Directive 92/83 do not allow the Member States to adopt
measures which result in discrimination against similar prod-
ucts imported from other Member States and that, in any
event, Article 23(2) of Directive 92/83 cannot under any
circumstances justify an infringement of Article 90 EC.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale
Amministrativo Regionale per la Puglia by order of
10 October 2001 in the case of Anna Fascicolo and Others
against Regione Puglia and of Grazia Berardi and Others
against Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale BA/4 and Others

That provision of the directive, which does not require, but
allows, a reduced rate to be applied to the product in question,
charges the Member State with the responsibility for examining
whether, on the basis of the particular circumstances of the
market, the difference in taxation gives rise to protection of a
domestic product and discrimination against imported prod-
ucts, in which case it must refrain from applying the reduced
rate.

A system of taxation can be considered compatible with the
first paragraph of Article 90 EC only if it is arranged in such a
way that it in any event precludes a higher charge being
imposed on imported products than on domestic products.

(1) OJ L 316, 31.10.1992, p. 21.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungs-
gericht Mainz by order of 10 December 2001 in the case
of Emil Färber GmbH & Co. KG against Landkreis
Alzey-Worms

(Case C-2/02)

(2002/C 68/10)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Verwaltungsgericht
Mainz (Administrative Court, Mainz) of 10 December 2001,
received at the Court Registry on 7 January 2002, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of Emil Färber GmbH & Co. KG
against Landkreis Alzey-Worms on the following question:

Is paragraph 2(a) of Chapter I of Annex A to Directive
85/73/EEC (1), in the version set out in Directive 96/43/EC (2),
to be interpreted as meaning that the standard fee governed by
that paragraph covering controls and inspections connected
with cutting operations is payable only in respect of meat that
is actually cut at a cutting plant, or is it to be interpreted as
meaning that such fee is payable in respect of all meat entering
the cutting plant, whether it is cut or not?

(1) OJ L 32, p. 14.
(2) OJ L 162, p. 1.

(Cases C-10/02 and C-11/02)

(2002/C 68/11)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Tribunale Amministra-
tivo Regionale per la Puglia (Regional Administrative Court,
Puglia) of 10 October 2001, received at the Court Registry on
15 January 2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Anna
Fascicolo and Others against Regione Puglia and of Grazia
Berardi and Others against Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale
BA/4 and Otheres on the questions

1. whether, under Article 7(2) of Directive 86/457/EEC (1)
and Article 36(2) of Directive 93/16/EEC (2), for the
purpose of the exercise of general medical practice a right
to practise acquired on or before 31 December 1994 is
to be regarded as equivalent to the certificate of specific
training in general medical practice;

2. whether, pursuant to the abovementioned Community
provisions, with effect from 1 January 1995 the award of
a certificate of specific training in general medical practice
allows Member States to grant to doctors who also have
a right to practise acquired on or before 31 December
1994 more favourable terms in the form of access to a
wider range of reserved posts than that granted to the
holders of either one qualification or the other;

3.

if the previous question is answered in the affirmative,

whether, finally, in view of the rules applicable to acquired
rights, the abovementioned condition allows the Member
States to grant
the abovementioned doctors further
special treatment by in all cases granting them additional
points for obtaining the certificate of specific training in
general medical practice.

(1) OJ L 267, 19.9.1986, p. 26.
(2) OJ L 165, 7.7.1993, p. 1.