1964 ( REGULATION NO 82/64 OF 30 JUNE 1964 ( JOURNAL OFFICIEL 1964 , P . 1626 ) ON LEVYING THE CHARGES IN QUESTION IS CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 12 ( 2 ) OF REGULATION NO 14/64 OF THE COUNCIL OF 5 FEBRUARY 1964 ON THE PROGRESSIVE ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN BEEF AND VEAL ( JOURNAL OFFICIEL 34 OF 27 FEBRUARY 1964 , P . 562 ) WHICH WAS REPLACED WITH EFFECT FROM 29 JULY 1968 BY ARTICLE 20 ( 2 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 805/68 OF THE COUNCIL OF 27 JUNE 1968 ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN BEEF AND VEAL ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL ENGLISH SPECIAL EDITION 1968 ( I ), P . 187 ). THERE HAS BEEN NO CONTENTION THAT ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE PROHIBITION QUESTION , FOR WHICH PROVISION IS MADE IN ARTICLE 20 , APPLIED DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION IN RELATION TO THE IMPORTATION OF BEEF AND VEAL FROM NON-MEMBER COUNTRIES .
4 THE PURPOSE OF THE QUESTIONS REFERRED TO THE COURT IS IN SUBSTANCE TO FIND OUT WHETHER COMMUNITY LAW AND , INTER ALIA , THE RULES RELATING TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS , THE PRINCIPLES RELATING TO THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF COMPETITION IN THE COMMON MARKET AND FINALLY THE SYSTEM OF JUDICIAL PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS CONTAINED IN PARTICULAR IN ARTICLES 171 , 177 AND 189 OF THE TREATY PERMIT OR REQUIRE OR POSSIBLY FORBID - AND IF SO UPON WHAT CONDITIONS - MEMBER STATES TO GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR REPAYMENT OF NATIONAL CHARGES OF THE KIND WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE MAIN ACTION OR WHETHER , ON THE CONTRARY , THE MATTER IS GOVERNED BY THE RULES OF THE DOMESTIC LAW OF EACH MEMBER STATE .
5 THE STATEMENT OF THE REASONS ON WHICH THE ORDER MAKING THE REFERENCE IS BASED SHOWS THAT THE QUESTIONS REFERRED TO THE COURT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO ELICIT A REPLY COVERING THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE CONTESTED CHARGES WERE PAID VOLUNTARILY WITHOUT RESERVATION FOR A LONG PERIOD BY THE TRADERS CONCERNED ON THE ASSUMPTION COMMON TO THEM AND TO THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES THAT THEY WERE NOT OPEN TO CRITICISM FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THEIR COMPATIBILITY WITH COMMUNITY LAW . THE INCOMPATIBILITY BECAME APPARENT ONLY GRADUALLY AT A LATER DATE AS A RESULT OF THE INTERPRETATION GIVEN BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE TO THE CONCEPT OF CHARGES HAVING AN EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO CUSTOMS DUTIES WHICH LED THE COURT FOR THE FIRST TIME TO CLASSIFY CHARGES FOR HEALTH INSPECTIONS IN THAT WAY IN ITS JUDGMENT OF 14 DECEMBER 1972 IN CASE 29/72 , MARIMEX V ITALIAN FINANCE ADMINISTRATION ( 1972 ) ECR 1309 .
6 ACCORDING TO THE ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW OF THE COURT , THE PROHIBITION ON THE LEVYING OF CHARGES HAVING AN EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO CUSTOMS DUTIES , WHETHER IT HAS ITS ORIGIN IN THE GENERAL RULE CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 13 OF THE TREATY WITH EFFECT FROM 1 JANUARY 1970 , AT THE END