Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 January 2003 in Case C-462/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Halmstads tingsrätt): Ulf Hammarsten (Common organisation of the markets in the flax and hemp sector — Articles 28 EC and 30 EC — National legislation prohibiting all cultivation and possession of hemp without prior authorisation)
Date: 2003-02-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Sweden, hemp, interpretation of the law, production quota

22.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/9

1. Declares that, by allowing discriminatory, advantageous rates
for admission to museums, monuments, galleries, archaeological
digs, parks and gardens classified as public monuments, granted
by local or decentralised State authorities only in favour of
Italian nationals and persons resident within the territory of
those authorities running the cultural sites in question, who are
aged over 60 or 65 years, and by excluding from such
advantages tourists who are nationals of other Member
States and non-residents who fulfil the same objective age
requirements,
its
obligations under Articles 12 EC and 49 EC;

the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

( 1) OJ C 348 of 8.12.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 16 January 2003

in Case C-439/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat im Land Niederöster-
reich): Libor Cipra Vlastimil Kvasnicka v Bezirk-
shauptmannschaft Mistelbach (1)

(Road transport — Social legislation — Regulation (EEC)
No 3820/85 — Breaks and rest periods — Crew consisting
of more than one driver — Jurisdiction of the Court
to interpret the AETR Agreement — Principle of legal
certainty)

(2003/C 44/16)

(Language of the case: German)

1.

2.

3.

4.

In the case of transport by more than one driver, Article 8(2) of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 on the harmonisation
of certain social legislation relating to road transport applies as
a lex specialis that prevails over paragraph 1 of that article.
Consequently, those provisions are not to be applied cumulat-
ively.

The same interpretation applies to Article 8(1) and (2) of the
European Agreement concerning the Work of Crews of Vehicles
engaged in International Road Transport (AETR).

It is for the national court to determine, having regard to the
facts of the main proceedings, whether it is appropriate to apply
the provisions of Regulation No 3820/85 or those of that
agreement.

Examination of Article 8(1) and (2) of Regulation No 3820/
85 in the light of the principle of legal certainty has failed to
disclose any matters of such a kind as to affect its validity.

(1) OJ C 31 of 2.2.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 16 January 2003

in Case C-462/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Halmstads tingsrätt): Ulf Hammarsten (1)

(Common organisation of the markets in the flax and hemp
sector — Articles 28 EC and 30 EC — National legislation
prohibiting all cultivation and possession of hemp without
prior authorisation)

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

(2003/C 44/17)

(Language of the case: Swedish)

In Case C-439/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat im Land Niederös-
terreich (Austria) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
pending before that court between Libor Cipra Vlastimil
Kvasnicka and Bezirkshauptmannschaft Mistelbach, on the
interpretation and validity of Article 8(1) and (2) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 of 20 December 1985 on the
harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road
transport (OJ 1985 L 370, p. 1), the Court (Fifth Chamber),
composed of: M. Wathelet, President of
the Chamber,
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, S. von Bahr and A. Rosas
(Rapporteur), Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General; R. Grass,
Registrar, has given a judgment on 16 January 2003, in which
it has ruled:

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

In Case C-462/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Halmstads tingsrätt (Sweden) for a preliminary ruling
in criminal proceedings before it against Ulf Hammarsten on
the interpretation of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC and of
the Community legislation applicable to the cultivation and
marketing of hemp, the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of:
M. Wathelet, President of the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward, A. La
Pergola (Rapporteur), P. Jann and A. Rosas, Judges; C. Stix-
Hackl, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a
judgment on 16 January 2003, in which it has ruled:

C 44/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.2.2003

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68 of 16.3.2002.

Regulation (EEC) No 1308/70 of the Council of 29 June 1970 on
the common organisation of the market in flax and hemp, as amended
by Council Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000 of 19 December 2000
on information and promotion actions for agricultural products on
the internal market and Regulation (EEC) No 619/71 of the Council
of 22 March 1971 laying down general rules for granting aid for
flax and hemp, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1420/
98 of 26 June 1998, must be interpreted so precluding national
legislation which has the effect of prohibiting the cultivation and
possession of industrial hemp covered by those regulations.

( 1) OJ C 84 of 6.4.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 16 January 2003

in Case C-63/02: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland (1)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 16 January 2003

in Case C-29/02: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Kingdom of Spain (1)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure
to implement Directive 98/83/EC)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure
to transpose Directive 98/83/EC)

(2003/C 44/18)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

(2003/C 44/19)

(Language of the case: English)

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

In Case C-29/02, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: G. Valero Jordana) v Kingdom of Spain (Agent:
L. Fraguas Gadea): Application for a declaration that, by failing
to adopt or, in any event, to communicate to the Commission
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary
to comply with Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November
1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption
(OJ 1998 L 330, p. 32), the Kingdom of Spain has failed to
fulfil
its obligations under that directive, the Court (First
Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet, President of the Chamb-
er, P.
Judges; S. Alber,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 16 January 2003, in which it:

Jann and A. Rosas (Rapporteur),

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council
Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of
water intended for human consumption, the Kingdom of Spain
has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

In Case C-63/02, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: M. Shotter) v United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland (Agents: P. Ormond, assisted by M. Demetri-
ou, barrister): Application for a declaration that, by failing to
adopt for Northern Ireland and Wales all the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the
quality of water intended for human consumption (OJ 1998
in any event, by failing to notify such
L 330, p. 32) or,
provisions to the Commission, the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 17(1) and (2) of
that directive, the Court
(First Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet, President of the
Chamber, P. Jann and A. Rosas (Rapporteur), Judges; S. Alber,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 16 January 2003, in which it:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt for Northern Ireland and
Wales all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
necessary to comply with Council Directive 98/83/EC of
3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
consumption,
Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil
its obligations under
Article 17(1) of that directive;