Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of  6 December 2005  in Case C-461/03: reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven Gaston Schul Douane-expediteur BV v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (Article 234 EC — Obligation on a national court to seek a preliminary ruling — Invalidity of a provision of Community law — Sugar — Additional import duty — Regulation (EC) No 1423/95 — Article 4)
Date: 2006-02-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: customs duties, import, interpretation of the law, representative price, sugar

11.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/7

5. Even in the case in which a court of a Member State forms the
view that the conditions have been satisfied under which it may
suspend application of a Community measure, in particular where
the validity of that measure has already been
the question of
referred to the Court, the competent national administrative autho-
rities of the other Member States cannot suspend application of
that measure until such time as the Court has ruled on its validity.
National courts alone are entitled to determine, taking into consid-
eration the specific circumstances of the cases brought before them,
whether the conditions governing the grant of interim relief have
been satisfied.

(1) OJ C 7, 10.01.2004.

OJ C 59, 06.03.2004.
OJ C 179, 10.07.2004.

1. The third paragraph of Article 234 EC requires a court or tribunal
of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial
remedy under national
law to seek a ruling from the Court of
Justice on a question relating to the validity of the provisions of a
regulation even where the Court has already declared invalid analo-
gous provisions of another comparable regulation;

2. Paragraphs (1) and (2) of Article 4 of Commission Regulation
(EC) No 1423/95 of 23 June 1995 laying down detailed imple-
menting rules for the import of products in the sugar sector other
than molasses are invalid inasmuch as they provide that the addi-
tional duty referred to therein is, as a general rule, established on
the basis of the representative price referred to in Article 1(2) of
that regulation and that that duty is established on the basis of
the cif import price of the shipment concerned only if the importer
so requests.

(1) OJ C 7, 10.01.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Grand Chamber)

of 6 December 2005

in Case C-461/03: reference for a preliminary ruling from
the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven Gaston
Schul Douane-expediteur BV v Minister van Landbouw,
Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (1)

(Article 234 EC — Obligation on a national court to seek a
preliminary ruling — Invalidity of a provision of Community
law — Sugar — Additional import duty — Regulation (EC)
No 1423/95 — Article 4)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

of 24 November 2005

in Case C-506/03: Federal Republic of Germany v Commis-
sion of the European Communities (1)

(Subsidies — Feasibility study — Contract for the assign-
ment of intellectual property rights)

(2006/C 36/11)

(2006/C 36/12)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case C-461/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijf-
sleven (Netherlands), made by decision of 24 October 2003,
received at the Court on 4 November 2003, in the proceedings
between Gaston Schul Douane-expediteur BV and Minister
van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit — the Court
(Grand Chamber), composed of V. Skouris, President, P. Jann,
C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas and J. Malenovský, Presidents of
Chambers, N. Colneric (Rapporteur), S. von Bahr, J.N. Cunha
Rodrigues, R. Silva de Lapuerta, K. Lenaerts, G. Arestis, A. Borg
Barthet and M. Ilešič, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate
General, R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 6 December
2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

In Case C-506/03 Federal Republic of Germany (Agent: M.
Lumma, assisted by C. von Donat, Rechtsanwalt) v Commis-
sion of the European Communities (Agents: G. Zavvos and
C. Schmidt, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, Rechtsanwalt) — action
for annulment under Article 230 EC, brought on 26 November
2003 — the Court (Fourth Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts,
Acting President of the Fourth Chamber, M. Ilešič and E. Levits
(Rapporteur),
Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate
General; K. Sztranc, Administrator for the Registrar, gave a
judgment on 24 November 2005, in which it:

1. Dismisses the action;