Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) 8 January 2002 in Case C-248/99 P: French Republic v Monsanto Company (Appeal — Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 — Application to include a recombinant bovine somatotrophin (BST) in the list of substances not subject to a maximum residue limit — Prohibition on placing that substance on the market — Rejection of the application for inclusion)
Date: 2002-04-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, action for annulment (EU), appeal, marketing standard, veterinary medicinal product

6.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 84/5

legislation which,

1. Articles 5 and 85 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 10 EC and
81 EC) do not preclude national
in the
context of a summary procedure for the recovery of debts relating
to the fees of an architect, a member of a professional
association, requires the court seised of the dispute to follow the
opinion of that association in relation to the settlement of those
fees in so far as that opinion ceases to be binding where the
debtor initiates proceedings inter partes.

2. Articles 5 and 85 of the Treaty do not preclude national
legislation which provides that the members of a profession may
set at their discretion the fees for certain services which they
perform.

(1) OJ C 246 of 28.8.1999.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

8 January 2002

in Case C-248/99 P: French Republic v Monsanto Com-
pany (1)

(Appeal — Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 — Application to
include a recombinant bovine somatotrophin (BST) in the
list of substances not subject to a maximum residue limit —
Prohibition on placing that substance on the market —
Rejection of the application for inclusion)

(2002/C 84/08)

(Language of the case: English)

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

initially
In Case C-248/99 P, French Republic (agents:
R. Abraham and J.-F. Dobelle and K. Rispal-Bellanger and
C. Vasak, and, subsequently, G. de Bergues): Appeal against
the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities
(Second Chamber) of 22 April 1999 in
Case T-112/97 Monsanto v Commission [1999] ECR II-1277,
seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other parties to
the proceedings being: Monsanto Company, registered in
accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware (United
States of America), (agents: C. Stanbrook, QC, and D. Holland,
barrister), and Commission of the European Communities
(agents: J.-L. Dewost, R. Wainwright and T. Christoforou) the
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of the
Chamber, A. La Pergola, L. Sevo´ n (Rapporteur), M. Wathelet
and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges, Advocate General: S. Alber,
Registrar: L. Hewlett, Administrator, has given a judgment on
8 January 2002, in which it:

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities of 22 April 1999 in Case T-112/97
Monsanto v Commission;

2. Dismisses the application for annulment of Decision C(97)
148 final of the Commission of 14 January 1997 concerning
the definition of a position, in accordance with Article 175 of
the EC Treaty, on the inclusion of bovine somatotrophin in
Annex II to Regulation No 2377/90;

3. Orders Monsanto Company to bear its own costs and to
pay the costs incurred by the Commission of the European
Communities both before the Court of First Instance and the
Court of Justice;

4. Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs incurred both
before the Court of First Instance and the Court of Justice.

(1) OJ C 265 of 18.9.1999.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

5 February 2002

in Case C-255/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Oberster Gerichtshof): Anna Humer (1)

(Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Definition of ‘family
benefits’ — Payment of advances on maintenance payments
— Condition that the minor child must be resident within
the national territory — Entitlement to benefits abroad)

(2002/C 84/09)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-255/99: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) for a preliminary ruling
in the proceedings pending before that court concerning the
minor Anna Humer, on the interpretation of Articles 3, 4(1)(h),
73 and 74 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of
14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to
employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members
of their families moving within the Community, as amended
and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of
2 December 1996 (OJ 1997 L 28, p. 1), and of Articles 3(1)
and 7(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of
15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers
within the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (II),
p. 475), the Court, composed of: P. Jann, President of the First
and Fifth Chambers, acting for the President, F. Macken
and N. Colneric (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann,
D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur), A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet,
Judges, Advocate General:
R. Schintgen and V. Skouris,
S. Alber, Registrar: H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, has
given a judgment on 5 February 2002, in which it has ruled: