Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 26 May 2005 in Case C-332/03: Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Fishing — Conservation and management of resources — Regulations (EEC) Nos 3760/92 and 2847/93 — Measures of control of fishing activities)
Date: 2005-07-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Portugal, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, catch quota, fishery management, fishing rights

C 182/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.7.2005

— on the other hand, the amount thus withheld over a given period
by all the dairies is aggregated before being redistributed, after
possible financial adjustments between the dairies, in the form of
in amount paid by each dairy, per 100
supplements identical
kilogrammes of milk delivered to it during that period, to those
dairy farmers alone who have delivered milk meeting those quality
criteria.

2. Orders Huhtamaki Dourdan SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 213 of 6.9.2003.

(1) OJ C 213 of 06.09.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 26 May 2005

in Case C-332/03: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Portuguese Republic (1)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 12 May 2005

in Case C-315/03: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Huhtamaki Dourdan SA (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Fishing —
Conservation and management of resources — Regulations
(EEC) Nos 3760/92 and 2847/93 — Measures of control of
fishing activities)

(Arbitration clause — Repayment of an advance paid in the
course of performance of a research contract — Non-justifi-
cation of part of the costs)

(2005/C 182/16)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

(2005/C 182/15)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case C-315/03 Commission of the European Commu-
nities (Agent: C. Giolito) v Huhtamaki Dourdan SA, estab-
lished in Dourdan (France), (Lawyers: F. Puel and L. François-
Martin) — action under Article 238 EC, brought on 23 July
2003 — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of A. Borg
Barthet, President of the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur)
Judges; L. M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate
and S. von Bahr,
General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 12 May 2005,
in which it:

In Case C-332/03 Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: T. van Rijn and A.-M. Alves Vieira) v Portuguese
Republic (Agents: L. Fernandes and M.J. Policarpo) — action
for failure to fulfil obligations under Article 226 EC, brought
on 29 July 2003 — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of
the Chamber,
A. Rosas,
Puissochet
(Rapporteur), S. von Bahr,
J. Malenovský and U. Lõhmus,
Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,
gave a judgment on 26 May 2005, in which it:

President of

J.-P.

1. Declares that, by failing, in respect of the fishing years 1994 to

1996,

1. Orders Huhtamaki Dourdan SA to pay the Commission of the
European Communities
the sum of EUR 151 533,47 repre-
senting the total capital of the repayment of part of the advance
paid to it in the context of contract No BRST-CT 98 5422, the
sum of EUR 23 583,63 representing the interest due at the date
of the present judgment, and interest at the rate of 4.81 % on the
total capital still to be repaid with effect from the day after this
judgment and until its debt has been fully repaid;

— to adopt appropriate rules for the use of the quotas allocated

to it,

— to ensure compliance with Community legislation in the field
of conservation, by means of sufficient supervision of fishing
activities and adequate inspection of the fishing fleet and of
the unloading and recording of catches,

23.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/9

— to impose a provisional prohibition of fishing by vessels flying
its flag or registered in its territory when the quota allocated to
it was deemed to be exhausted, and by having finally prohib-
ited fishing only when its quota had already been greatly
exceeded,

— to ensure

the

effective operation of a validation system
including verification by cross-checking data and monitoring
of data by means of a computerised database,

failed to fulfil

its obligations
the Portuguese Republic has
concerning the management and control of
the above fishing
quotas relating to the years 1994, 1995 and 1996, under
Article 9(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92 of 20
December 1992 establishing a Community system for fisheries
and aquaculture and Articles 2, 19(1) and (2) and 21(1) and (2)
of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993
establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries
policy;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 135 of 7.6.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 12 May 2005

in Case C-347/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Tribunale amministrativo regionale del Lazio Regione
autonoma Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Agenzia regionale per
lo sviluppo rurale (ERSA) v Ministero delle Politiche Agri-
cole e Forestali (1)

(External relations — EC-Hungary Agreement on the reci-
procal protection and control of wine names — Protection in
the Community of a name relating to certain wines origin-
ating in Hungary — Geographical
indication ‘Tokaj’ —
Exchange of letters — Possibility of using the word ‘Tocai’ in
the term ‘Tocai friulano’ or ‘Tocai italico’ for the description
and presentation of certain Italian wines,
in particular
quality wines produced in specified regions (‘quality wines
psr’), during a transitional period expiring on 31 March
2007 — Exclusion of that possibility at the end of the transi-
tional period — Validity — Legal basis — Article 133 EC —
Principles of international law relating to treaties — Articles
22 to 24 of the TRIPs Agreement — Protection of funda-
mental rights — Right to property)

(2005/C 182/17)

(Language of the case: Italian)

In Case C-347/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale del

Lazio (Italy), made by decision of 9 June 2003, received at the
Court on 7 August 2003, in the proceedings between Regione
autonoma Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Agenzia regionale per lo
sviluppo rurale (ERSA), on the one hand, and Ministero delle
Politiche Agricole e Forestali, on the other, third party: Regione
Veneto — the Court (Second Chamber) composed of C.W.A.
Timmermans (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, R. Silva
de Lapuerta, R. Schintgen, G. Arestis and J. Klučka, Judges; F.G.
Jacobs, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator,
for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 12 May 2005, in which
it ruled:

1. The Europe Agreement establishing an association between the
European Communities and their Member States, of the one part,
and the Republic of Hungary, of the other part, is not the legal
basis of Council Decision 93/724/EC of 23 November 1993
concerning the conclusion of the Agreement between the European
Community and the Republic of Hungary on the reciprocal protec-
tion and control of wine names.

2. Article 133 EC, as referred to in the preamble to Decision
93/724, is an appropriate legal basis for the conclusion by the
Community alone of the Agreement between the European Com-
munity and the Republic of Hungary on the reciprocal protection
and control of wine names.

3. The prohibition of use of the name ‘Tocai’ in Italy after 31 March
2007 resulting from the exchange of letters concerning Article 4
of
the Agreement between the European Community and the
Republic of Hungary on the reciprocal protection and control of
wine names is not contrary to the rules governing homonyms laid
down in Article 4(5) of that agreement.

4. The Joint Declaration concerning Article 4(5) of the Agreement
between the European Community and the Republic of Hungary
on the reciprocal protection and control of wine names, in so far
as it states in the first paragraph that in respect of Article 4(5)(a)
of that agreement the Contracting Parties noted that at the time of
the negotiations they were not aware of any specific case to which
the provisions referred to could be applicable, is not a clear misre-
presentation of reality.

5. Articles 22 to 24 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights, set out in Annex 1 C to the Agree-
ment establishing the World Trade Organisation, approved on
behalf of the Community, as regards matters within its compe-
tence, by Council Decision 94/800/EC of 22 December 1994,
are to be interpreted as meaning that, in a case such as that in the
main proceedings, which concerns homonymity between a geogra-
indication of a third country and a name including the
phical
name of a vine variety used for the description and presentation of
certain Community wines made from it, those provisions do not
require that that name may continue to be used in the future
notwithstanding the twofold circumstance that it has been used in
the past by the producers concerned either in good faith or for at
least 10 years prior to 15 April 1994 and that it clearly identifies
the country, region or area of origin of the protected wine in such
a way as not to mislead the consumer.