Case C-141/15: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the tribunal administratif de Rennes — France) — Doux SA, in administration v Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EC) No 543/2008 — Article 15(1) — Article 16 — Frozen or quick-frozen chickens — Maximum limit for water content — Obsolescence of that limit — Practical measures for checks — Counter-analysis — Regulation No 612/2009 — Article 28 — Export refunds on agricultural products — Conditions for granting — Sound and fair marketable quality — Products marketable in normal conditions)
Date: 2017-03-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: customs formalities, customs inspection, export refund, food inspection, frozen product, health certificate, poultrymeat, product quality, sampling, veterinary inspection








C_2017144EN.01000201.xml










8.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 144/2





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the tribunal administratif de Rennes — France) — Doux SA, in administration v Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)
(Case C-141/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EC) No 543/2008 - Article 15(1) - Article 16 - Frozen or quick-frozen chickens - Maximum limit for water content - Obsolescence of that limit - Practical measures for checks - Counter-analysis - Regulation No 612/2009 - Article 28 - Export refunds on agricultural products - Conditions for granting - Sound and fair marketable quality - Products marketable in normal conditions))
(2017/C 144/02)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal administratif de Rennes

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Doux SA, in administration

Defendant: Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)

Operative part of the judgment







1.


The examination of the third question did not bring to light any evidence able to affect the validity of the limits for water content in frozen chicken meat laid down in Article 15(1) and Annexes VI and VII to Commission Regulation (EC) No 543/2008 of 16 June 2008 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards the marketing standards for poultrymeat, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2012 of 19 December 2012.










2.


Article 28(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 612/2009 of 7 July 2009 on laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) No 173/2011 of 23 February 2011, must be interpreted as meaning that frozen or quick-frozen chickens with a water content exceeding the limits set by Regulation No 543/2008, as amended by Implementing Regulation No 1239/2012, are not marketable in normal conditions on the territory of the European Union and do not satisfy the requirement of sound and fair marketable quality, even if they are accompanied by a health certificate issued by the competent authority.










3.


Since Annexes VI and VII to Regulation No 543/2008, as amended by Implementing Regulation No 1239/2012, are sufficiently precise for the purpose of carrying out the checks on frozen and quick-frozen chickens intended for export with export refunds, the fact that a Member State has not adopted practical measures, whose adoption is provided for in Article 18(2) of that regulation, does not prevent those checks from being relied on against the undertakings concerned.










4.


An exporter of frozen or quick-frozen chickens may, in accordance with Article 118(2) and Article 119(1), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 450/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 laying down the Community Customs Code (Modernised Customs Code) may, first, be present or represented when the goods are examined and when samples are taken and, second, may request a further examination or sampling of the goods if he considers that the results obtained by the competent authorities are not valid.






(1)  OJ C 190, 8.6.2015.