Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 May 2005 in Case C-132/03 Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato in Ministero della Salute v Coordinamento delle associazioni per la difesa dell'ambiente e dei diritti degli utenti e dei consumatori (Codacons), Federconsumatori (Regulation (EC) No 1139/98 — Article 2(2)(b) — Additional labelling requirement for foodstuffs — Compulsory particulars concerning the presence of material derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) — Genetically modified soya beans and maize — Exemption from the requirement in the case of adventitious presence not exceeding a particular level — Foodstuffs intended for particular nutritional use — Infants and young children — Whether derogation applies — Precautionary principle)
Date: 2005-10-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: child, consumer protection, genetically modified organism, human nutrition, interpretation of the law, labelling

C 271/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.10.2005

Mühlendahl and G. Schneider,) — the Court (Third Chamber),
composed of A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, J. P. Puisso-
chet, S. von Bahr,
J. Malenovský and A. Ó Caoimh
(Rapporteur), Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; M. Ferreira,
Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on
15 September 2005, in which it:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the Euro-
pean Communities of 5 December 2002 in Case T-91/01 BioID
v OHIM (BioID) [2002] ECR II-5159;

1. Declares that, by failing to carry out, prior to the construction of
the pig farms in the Baix Ter area or their alteration, an impact
assessment, contrary to the requirements of Articles 2 and 4(2) of
Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assess-
ment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the
environment, and by exceeding, in various public water distribu-
tion networks in the Baix Ter area, the maximum admissible
concentration for the nitrates parameter laid down in point 20 of
Annex IC to Council Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980
relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption,
contrary to Article 7(6) of that directive, the Kingdom of Spain
has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives;

2. Dismisses the action against the decision of the Second Board of
Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) of 20 February 2001;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the appellant to pay the costs of the proceedings at first

instance and on appeal.

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay two thirds of all the costs
and the Commission of the European Communities to bear the
other third.

(1) OJ 70, 22.03.2003.

(1) OJ C 135 of 07.06.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 8 September 2005

(Second Chamber)

of 26 May 2005

in Case C-121/03: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Kingdom of Spain (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directives
75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC — Meaning of ‘waste’ —
Directives 85/337/EEC and 97/11/EC — Assessment of the
effects of certain public and private projects on the environ-
ment — Directive 80/68/EEC — Protection of groundwater
against pollution caused by certain dangerous substances —
Directive 80/778/EEC — Quality of water intended for
human consumption)

(2005/C 271/03)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

In Case C-121/03: Action under Article 226 EC for failure to
fulfil obligations, brought on 19 March 2003, by Commission
of the European Communities (Agent: G. Valero Jordana) v
Kingdom of Spain (Agent: N. Díaz Abad) — the Court (Third
Chamber), composed of A. Rosas, President of the Chamber,
J.P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), S. von Bahr, U. Lõhmus and A. Ó
Caoimh, Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; M. Ferreira,
Principal Administrator, gave a judgment on 8 September
2005, in which it:

in Case C-132/03 Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Consiglio di Stato in Ministero della Salute v Coordi-
namento delle associazioni per la difesa dell'ambiente e
(Codacons),
dei diritti degli utenti e dei consumatori

Federconsumatori (1)

(Regulation (EC) No 1139/98 — Article 2(2)(b) — Addi-
tional
labelling requirement for foodstuffs — Compulsory
particulars concerning the presence of material derived from
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) — Genetically modi-
fied soya beans and maize — Exemption from the require-
ment in the case of adventitious presence not exceeding a par-
ticular level — Foodstuffs intended for particular nutritional
use — Infants and young children — Whether derogation
applies — Precautionary principle)

(2005/C 271/04)

(Language of the case: Italian)

In Case C-132/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy), made by
decision of 25 March 2003, received at
the Court on 28
January 2003 in the proceedings between Ministero della

29.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/3

Salute and Coordinamento delle associazioni per la difesa
dell'ambiente e dei diritti degli utenti e dei consumatori
(Codacons), Federconsumatori,
intervening parties: Lega delle
Cooperative, Associazione Italiana Industrie Prodotti Alimentari
(AIIPA), Adusbef — the Court (Second Chamber) composed of
C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber,
C. Gulmann and R. Schintgen,,
Judges; P. Léger, Advocate
General, M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal Administrator, Regis-
trar, gave a judgment on 26 May 2005, the operative part of
which is as follows:

Article 2(2)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1139/98 of 26 May
1998 concerning the compulsory indication on the labelling of certain
foodstuffs produced from genetically modified organisms of particulars
other than those provided for in Directive 79/112/EEC, as amended
by Commission Regulation (EC) No 49/2000 of 10 January 2000,
is to be interpreted as meaning that the exemption for which it
provides from the obligation, laid down in Article 2(1) and (3) of
that regulation, to state on the labelling of foodstuffs that material
derived from certain GMOs is present, where such presence is the
result of adventitious
contamination and does not exceed a de
minimis threshold of 1 %, also applies to foodstuffs intended for the
particular nutritional use of infants and young children.

(1) OJ C 135 of 07.06.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 15 September 2005

in Case C-199/03: Ireland v Commission of the European
Communities (1)

(Action for annulment — European Social Fund — Reduc-
tion of Community financial assistance — Manifest error of
assessment — Proportionality — Legal certainty — Legiti-
mate expectations)

(2005/C 271/05)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-199/03: Ireland (Agent: D. O'Hagan, P. Gallagher SC
and P. McGarry BL) v Commission of the European Commu-
nities (Agent: L. Flynn) — action for annulment under Article
230 EC, brought on 13 May 2003 — the Court (Second
Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the
Chamber, R. Silva de Lapuerta (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen, G.
Arestis and J. Klučka, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; L.

Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judg-
ment on 15 September 2005, in which it:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ireland to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 200 of 23.08.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 15 September 2005

in Joined Cases C-281/03 and C-282/03, Reference for a
preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het
bedrijfsleven: Cindu Chemicals BV and Others v College
voor de toelating van bestrijdingsmiddelen (1)

(Directive 76/769/EEC — Dangerous substances — Ability
of the Member States to lay down additional conditions for
the placing on the market and use of a biocidal product the
use of whose active substance is restricted by the directive —
Wood preservatives containing coal-tar distillates (carbo-
containing
lineum and creosote) — Wood preservatives

copper, chrome and arsenic)

(2005/C 271/06)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

In Joined Cases C-281/03 and C-282/03: references for a preli-
minary ruling under Article 234 EC from the College van
Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands), made by decision
of 26 June 2003, received at the Court on 30 June 2003, in
the proceedings between Cindu Chemicals BV (C-281/03),
Rütgers VFT AG, Touwen & Co. BV, Pearl Paint Holland
BV, Elf Atochem Nederland BV, Zijlstra & Co. Verf BV,
Chemische Producten Struyk & Co. BV, Van Swaay
Schijndel BV, Houtbereiding G. Rozendaal BV, Arch
Timber Protection BV (C-282/03) and College voor de
toelating van bestrijdingsmiddelen,
intervener: Stichting
Behoud Leefmilieu en Natuur Maas en Waal — the Court
(Second Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, Presi-
dent of the Chamber, R. Silva de Lapuerta, J. Makarczyk, P.
Kūris and G. Arestis (Rapporteur), Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate
General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Regis-
trar, gave a judgment on 15 September 2005, the operative
part of which is as follows: