Case C-441/05: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 March 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative d'appel de Douai (France)) — Société Roquette Frères v Ministre de l'Agriculture, de l'Alimentation, de la Pêche et de la Ruralité (Common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector — Isoglucose — Determination of the basic quantities used for the allocation of production quotas — Isoglucose produced as an intermediate product — Article 24(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 — Article 27(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2038/1999 — Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 2073/2000 — Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 — Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1745/2002 — Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1739/2003 — Illegality of a Community measure raised before the national court — Reference for a preliminary ruling on validity — Admissibility — Conditions — Inadmissibility of an action for annulment of the Community measure)
Date: 2007-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: common organisation of markets, interpretation of the law, isoglucose, production quota, sugar industry

C 95/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

provisions are compatible with Article 49 EC, provided that other
effective legal remedies, which are no less favourable than those
governing similar domestic actions, make it possible for such a
question of compatibility to be determined as a preliminary issue,
which is a task that falls to the national court.

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Société Roquette Frères

2. The principle of effective judicial protection of an individual's rights
under Community law must be interpreted as requiring it to be
possible in the legal order of a Member State for interim relief to
be granted until the competent court has given a ruling on whether
national provisions are compatible with Community law, where the
grant of such relief is necessary to ensure the full effectiveness of the
judgment to be given on the existence of such rights.

3. The principle of effective judicial protection of an individual's rights
under Community law must be interpreted as meaning that, where
the compatibility of national provisions with Community law is
being challenged, the grant of any interim relief to suspend the
application of such provisions until the competent court has given a
ruling on whether those provisions are compatible with Community
law is governed by the criteria laid down by the national
law
applicable before that court, provided that those criteria are no less
favourable than those applying to similar domestic actions and do
not render practically impossible or excessively difficult the interim
judicial protection of those rights.

(1) OJ C 36, 11.2.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 March 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour adminis-
(France)) — Société Roquette
trative d'appel de Douai
Frères v Ministre de l'Agriculture, de l'Alimentation, de la
Pêche et de la Ruralité

(Case C-441/05) (1)

(Common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector —
Isoglucose — Determination of the basic quantities used for
the allocation of production quotas — Isoglucose produced as
an intermediate product — Article 24(2) of Regulation (EEC)
No 1785/81 — Article 27(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2038/
1999 — Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 2073/2000 —
Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 — Article 1
of Regulation (EC) No 1745/2002 — Article 1 of
Regulation (EC) No 1739/2003 — Illegality of a Community
measure raised before the national court — Reference for a
preliminary ruling on validity — Admissibility — Conditions
— Inadmissibility of an action for annulment of the Com-
munity measure)

(2007/C 95/16)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour administrative d'appel de Douai

Defendant: Ministre de l'Agriculture, de l'Alimentation, de la
Pêche et de la Ruralité

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour administrative
d'appel de Douai — Validity of Article 24(2) of Council Regu-
lation (EEC) No 1785/81 of 30 June 1981 on the common
organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (OJ 1981 L 177,
p. 4), Article 27(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2038/1999
of 13 September 1999 on the common organisation of the
markets in the sugar sector (OJ 1999 L 252, p. 1), Article 1 of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2000 of 29 September
2000 reducing, for the 2000/2001 marketing year, the guaran-
teed quantity under the production quotas scheme for the sugar
sector and the presumed maximum supply needs of sugar refi-
neries under the preferential import arrangements (OJ 2000 L
246, p. 38), Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/
2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the
markets in the sugar sector (OJ 2001 L 178, p. 1), Article 1 of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1745/2002 of 30 September
2002 reducing, for the 2002/2003 marketing year, the guaran-
teed quantity under the production quotas scheme for the sugar
sector and the presumed maximum supply needs of sugar refi-
neries under the preferential import arrangements (OJ 2002 L
263, p. 31) and Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1739/2003 of
30 September 2003 reducing, for the 2003/2004 marketing
year, the guaranteed quantity under the production quotas for
the sugar sector and the presumed maximum supply needs of
sugar refineries under preferential
imports (OJ 2003 L 249,
p. 38) — Setting of basic quantities for the allocation of isoglu-
cose production quotas without taking into account the isoglu-
cose produced as an intermediate product

Operative part of the judgment

1. A natural or legal person such as Roquette Frères, in factual and
legal circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, could
not undoubtedly have brought an admissible action on the basis of
Article 230 EC to annul:

— Article 24(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 of
30 June 1981 on the common organisation of the markets in
the sugar sector;

— Article 27(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2038/1999 of
the
13 September 1999 on the common organisation of
markets in the sugar sector;

— Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2000 of
for the 2000/01 marketing
the production quotas

29 September 2000 reducing,
year,

the guaranteed quantity under

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/11

scheme for the sugar sector and the presumed maximum supply
needs of sugar refineries under the preferential import arrange-
ments;

— Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of
19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in
the sugar sector;

— Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1745/2002 of
for the 2002/03 marketing
30 September 2002 reducing,
year,
the production quotas
scheme for the sugar sector and the presumed maximum supply
needs of sugar refineries under the preferential import arrange-
ments, and

the guaranteed quantity under

— Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1739/2003 of
30 September 2003 reducing,
for the 2003/04 marketing
year, the guaranteed quantity under the production quotas for
the sugar sector and the presumed maximum supply needs of
sugar refineries under preferential imports.

such a person may,

Therefore,
in proceedings brought under
national law, plead the illegality of those provisions even though it
has not brought an action for annulment of those provisions before
the Community Courts within the
laid down in
Article 230 EC.

time-limit

2. The examination of the second question has not revealed any factor
the validity of Article 24(2) of Regulation
such as to affect
No 1785/81, Article 27(3) of Regulation No 2038/1999,
Article 1 of Regulation No 2073/2000, Article 11(2) of Regu-
lation No 1260/2001, Article 1 of Regulation No 1745/2002
or Article 1 of Regulation No 1739/2003.

(1) OJ C 36, 11.2.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 March 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel
de Paris — France) — Thomson Multimedia Sales Europe
(C-447/05), Vestel France (C-448/05) v Administration des
douanes et droits indirects

(Joined Cases C-447/05 and C-448/05) (1)

(Community Customs Code — Implementing measures —
Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 — Annex 11 — Non-preferen-
tial origin of goods — Television receivers — Concept of
substantial processing or working — Criterion of added value
— Validity)

(2007/C 95/17)

Language of the cases: French

Referring court

Cour d'appel de Paris

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Thomson Multimedia Sales Europe (C-447/05), Vestel
France (C-448/05)

Defendant: Administration des douanes et droits indirects

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Cour d'appel de Paris — Validity of
Annex 11 to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of
2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Com-
munity Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1) — Criteria for
determining the non-preferential origin of goods — Television
manufactured in Poland but the cathode ray tube of which,
representing 42.43 % of the value of the apparatus, originates
in Korea

Operative part of the judgment

validity of

Consideration of the questions raised has disclosed nothing capable of
affecting the
in column three, under
the provisions
heading 8528 of the Combined Nomenclature, set out in Annex 11
to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying
down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code.

(1) OJ C 48, 25.2.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 March 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
des Landes Brandenburg — Germany) — Gerlach & Co.
mbH v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt (Oder)

(Case C-44/06) (1)

(Customs union — Community transit — Proof of the regu-
larity of a transit operation or of the place of the offence —
Three-month period — Period granted subsequent to the deci-
sion to recover the import duties)

(2007/C 95/18)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht des Landes Brandenburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gerlach & Co. mbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Frankfurt (Oder)