Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 5 February 2004 in Case C-265/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corta suprema di cassazione): Frahuil SA v Assitalia SpA (Brussels Convention — Special jurisdiction — Article 5(1) — Meaning of "matters relating to a contract" — Contract of guarantee entered into without the knowledge of the principal debtor — Subrogation of the guarantor to the rights of the creditor — Right of recourse of the guarantor against the principal debtor)
Date: 2004-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: contract, customs duties, guarantee, interpretation of the law, transport company

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 85/9

2. Article 1(3) of Directive 89/665, as amended by Directive 92/
50, must be interpreted as precluding a person who has
participated in a contract award procedure from being regarded
as having lost his interest in obtaining the contract on the
ground that, before seeking the review provided for by the
Directive, he failed to refer the case to a conciliation committee
such as Bundes-Vergabekontrollkommission (Federal Public
Procurement Review Commission, established by the Bundesge-
setz über die Vergabe von Aufträgen (Bundesvergabegesetz)
1997 (1997 Federal Law on Public Procurement).

The first sentence of Article 7(1) and Article 7(1)(f) of Commission
Regulation (EEC) No 536/93 of 9 March 1993 laying down
detailed rules on the application of the additional levy on milk and
milk products should be interpreted as meaning that the stock
accounts which producers are required to keep need state only the
quantities, per month and per product, of milk and/or milk products
sold.

(1) OJ C 202 of 24.8.2002.

(1) OJ C 219 of 14.9.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 12 February 2004

in Case C-236/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the College van Beroep): J. Slob v Productschap Zuivel (1)

(Milk and milk products — Direct sales — Reference
quantity — Overruns — Additional levy on milk — Obli-
gation on producer to keep stock accounts — Contents —
Interpretation of Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EEC) No 536/
93)

(2004/C 85/12)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

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

In Case C-236/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Nether-
lands) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between J. Slob and Productschap Zuivel, on
the interpretation of Article 7(1)(f) of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 536/93 of 9 March 1993 laying down detailed rules
on the application of the additional levy on milk and milk
products (OJ 1993 L 57, p. 12), the Court (Sixth Chamber),
composed of: C. Gulmann, acting for the President of the Sixth
Chamber, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, J.-P. Puissochet, F. Macken
and N. Colneric (Rapporteur), Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate
General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator Registrar, has
given a judgment on 12 February 2004, in which it has ruled:

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 5 February 2004

in Case C-265/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Corta suprema di cassazione): Frahuil SA v Assitalia
SpA (1)

(Brussels Convention — Special jurisdiction — Article 5(1)
— Meaning of ‘matters relating to a contract’ — Contract
of guarantee entered into without the knowledge of the
principal debtor — Subrogation of the guarantor to the
rights of the creditor — Right of recourse of the guarantor
against the principal debtor)

(2004/C 85/13)

(Language of the case: Italian)

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

In Case C-265/02: Reference to the Court under the Protocol
of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of
the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the
enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters by
the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) for a preliminary ruling
in the proceedings pending before that court between Frahuil
SA and Assitalia SpA, on the interpretation of Article 5(1) of
the abovementioned Convention of 27 September 1968 (OJ
1978 L 304, p. 36), as amended by the Convention of
9 October 1978 on the accession of the Kingdom of Denmark,
Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland (OJ 1978 L 304, p. 1 and — amended version —
p. 77), by the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the
accession of the Hellenic Republic (OJ 1982 L 388, p. 1) and
by the Convention of 26 May 1989 on the accession of the
Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic (OJ 1989
L 285, p. 1), the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: P. Jann
(Rapporteur), acting for the President of the Fifth Chamber,
C. W. A. Timmermans and S. von Bahr, Judges; P. Léger,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 5 February 2004, in which it has ruled:

C 85/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.4.2004

Article 5(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction
and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters,
as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the accession
of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, by the Convention of 25 October
1982 on the accession of the Hellenic Republic and by the Convention
of 26 May 1989 on the accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the
Portuguese Republic, must be interpreted as follows:

of initiating a procedure for that purpose without having
shown that it is necessary and proportionate, the Italian
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 28
EC and 30 EC, the Court (Third Chamber), composed of:
C. Gulmann, acting for the President of the Chamber, J.-
P. Puissochet and F. Macken (Rapporteur), Judges; J. Mischo,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 5 February 2004, in which it:

‘matters relating to a contract’ do not cover the obligation which a
guarantor who paid customs duties under a guarantee obtained by
the forwarding agent seeks to enforce in legal proceedings by way of
subrogation to the rights of the customs authorities and by way of
recourse against the owner of the goods, if the latter, who was not a
party to the contract of guarantee, did not authorise the conclusion of
that contract.

(1) OJ C 233 of 28.9.2002.

1. Declares that, by maintaining in force legislation which subjects
the marketing of
food products for sportsmen and women
lawfully manufactured and marketed in other Member States to
a requirement of applying for prior authorisation and of
initiating a procedure for that purpose without having shown
that it is necessary and proportionate, the Italian Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 28 EC and 30 EC;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 219 of 14.9.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 5 February 2004

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 12 February 2004

in Case C-270/02: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Italian Republic (1)

(Measures having equivalent effect — Foodstuffs for sports-
men and women lawfully manufactured and marketed in
other Member States — Prior marketing authorisation)

(2004/C 85/14)

(Language of the case: Italian)

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

in Case C-406/02: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Kingdom of Belgium (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure
to communicate reports required under Directives 76/464/
EEC, 78/659/EEC and 80/68/EEC — Standardising and
rationalising reports on the implementation of certain direc-
tives relating to the environment)

(2004/C 85/15)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case C-270/02, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: C.-F. Durand and R. Amorosi) v Italian Republic
(Agent: I. M. Braguglia, assisted by G. Aiello, avvocato dello
Stato) with an address for service in Luxembourg: Application
for a declaration that, by maintaining in force legislation which
subjects the marketing of food products for sportsmen and
women lawfully manufactured and marketed in other Member
States to a requirement of applying for prior authorisation and

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

In Case C-406/02, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: B. Stromsky) with an address for service in Luxem-
bourg, v Kingdom of Belgium (Agent: E. Dominkovitz) with
an address for service in Luxembourg: Application for a
declaration that, by failing to communicate to it, within the