Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 July 2005 in Case C-107/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo in Comité Andaluz de Agricultura Ecológica v Administración General del Estado, Comité Aragonés de Agricultura Ecológica (Community rules on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs — National legislation authorising the use of the term ‘bio’ in respect of products which have not been organically produced)
Date: 2005-09-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural product, foodstuff, free movement of goods, interpretation of the law, labelling, organic farming

C 217/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.9.2005

Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) — the Court
(First Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts, President of the
Fourth Chamber, acting for the President of the First Chamber,
N. Colneric (Rapporteur), K. Schiemann, E. Juhász and M. Ilešič,
Judges; F.G.
Jacobs, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 21 July
2005, in which it ruled:

Article 46(2)(a) 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, in its version amended and updated
by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2001/83 of 2 June 1983, as
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 3096/95 of 22 December
1995, must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to determine the
theoretical amount of the pension on which the calculation of the pro
rata pension is based, the competent institution is not required to take
into consideration a supplement intended to bring the pension to the
minimum level under national legislation where, on account of the
fact that the income limits fixed by the national legislation on that
supplement are exceeded, an insured person who has worked exclu-
sively in the Member State concerned cannot lay claim to such a
supplement.

(1) OJ C 85 of 03.04.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 21 July 2005

in Case C-71/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Tribunal Supremo in Administración del Estado v
Xunta de Galicia (1)

(State aid — Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty (now Article
88(3) EC) — Scheme of aid to shipbuilding and ship conver-
sion falling outside the scope of Directive 90/684/EEC —
Failure to give prior notification — Article 92(1) of the EC
Treaty (now Article 87(1) EC) — Concept of State aid —
Effect on trade between Member States)

(2005/C 217/30)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

Estado and Xunta de Galicia — the Court (Third Chamber),
composed of A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, J. P. Puisso-
chet, S. von Bahr, U. Lõhmus and A. Ó Caoimh (Rapporteur),
Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave
a judgment on 21 July 2005, in which it ruled:

scope

fall within the

The Commission of the European Communities must be given prior
notification, pursuant to Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty (now Article
88(3) EC), of a scheme of aid to shipbuilding and ship conversion
such as that set up by Decree No 217/1994 of 23 June 1994,
which does not
of Council Directive
90/684/EEC of 21 December 1990 on aid to shipbuilding, if it is
established that the scheme is capable of itself of giving rise to the
grant of State aid within the meaning of Article 92(1) of the EC
Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC).
is for the
national court, in cases of infringement of Article 93(3) of the EC
in accordance with its
Treaty, to draw the necessary consequences,
national law, with regard to both the validity of the acts giving effect
to the aid and the recovery of financial support granted in disregard
of that provision.

It

(1) OJ C 94 of 17.04.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 14 July 2005

in Case C-107/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Tribunal Supremo in Comité Andaluz de Agricultura
Ecológica v Administración General del Estado, Comité
Aragonés de Agricultura Ecológica (1)

(Community rules on organic production of agricultural
products and indications referring thereto on agricultural
products and foodstuffs — National legislation authorising
the use of the term ‘bio’ in respect of products which have
not been organically produced)

(2005/C 217/31)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

In Case C-71/04: REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain), made by
decision of 22 December 2003, received at the Court on 16
February 2004, in the proceedings between Administración del

In Case C-107/04: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain), made by
decision of 1 December 2003, received at the Court on 1
March 2004, in the proceedings between Comité Andaluz de
Agricultura Ecológica and Administración General del Estado,
Comité Aragonés de Agricultura Ecológica — the Court (First

3.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/17

Chamber), composed of P. Jann (Rapporteur), President of the
Chamber, K. Lenaerts, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, M. Ilešič and E.
Levits, Judges; J. Kokott, Advocate General; M. Ferreira, Prin-
cipal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 14
July 2005, in which it ruled:

March 2004 — the Court (First Chamber), composed of P.
Jann, President of the Chamber, N. Colneric, J.N. Cunha Rodri-
gues, M.
Judges; P. Léger,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 14
July 2005, in which it:

Ilešič and E. Levits (Rapporteur),

1. Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 of 24 June
1991 on organic production of agricultural products and indica-
tions referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs, as
amended to include livestock production by Council Regulation
(EC) No 1804/1999 of 19 July 1999 was to be interpreted as
not precluding products which were not organically produced from
bearing, in Spain, the indication ‘biológico’ or its derivative ‘bio’ in
the labelling, advertising material and commercial documents;

1. Declares that, by failing to grant parallel importers a reasonable
period in which to liquidate their stocks following withdrawal of a
marketing authorisation for a phytopharmaceutical
reference
product, the Federal Republic of Germany failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under Article 28 EC;

2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

2. That same Article 2, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No
392/2004 of 24 February 2004, must be
interpreted as
precluding from now on such products from bearing, in Spain, the
indication ‘biológico’ or its derivative ‘bio’ in the labelling, adver-
tising material and commercial documents.

(1) OJ C 106, 30.4.2004.

(1) OJ C 94 of 17.04.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 14 July 2005

in Case C-114/04: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Federal Republic of Germany (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 28
EC — Measures having equivalent effect — Withdrawal of a
marketing authorisation for a phytopharmaceutical reference
product — Lack of transition period for parallel importers
with a view to liquidation of their stocks)

(2005/C 217/32)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case C-114/04: Commission of the European Commu-
nities (Agents: B. Schima) v Federal Republic of Germany
(Agent: W.-D. Plessing and M. Lumma) — ACTION under
Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 3

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 16 June 2005

in Case C-138/04: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Kingdom of Denmark (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
83/183/EEC — Transfer of residence from one Member State
to another — Fee charged on registration of motor vehicles
— Tax exemption)

(2005/C 217/33)

(Language of the case: Danish)

In Case C-138/04: action for failure to fulfil obligations under
Article 226 EC, brought on 15 March 2004, Commission of
the European Communities (Agents: R. Lyal and T. Fich) v
Kingdom of Denmark (Agents:
J. Molde and A. Rahbøl
Jann,
Jacobsen) the Court (First Chamber), composed of P.
President of the Chamber, K. Lenaerts (Rapporteur), J.N. Cunha
Rodrigues, E. Juhász and M.Ilešič, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro,
Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the
Registrar, gave a judgment on 16 June 2005, in which it:

1. Dismisses the action.