RAISING OF SUCH PRICES DURING A GIVEN PERIOD IS, BY ITS NATURE, OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF THE POWERS RESERVED TO MEMBER STATES IF THE PRODUCTS TO WHICH THE LEGISLATION IS APPLICABLE FALL WITHIN THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN THE PIGMEAT AND BEEF AND VEAL SECTORS .
8 THE NATIONAL COURT CORRECTLY OBSERVES THAT IN ITS JUDGMENTS OF 26 FEBRUARY 1976 ( TASCA AND SADAM, SUPRA ) THE COURT HAS DECLARED THAT THE UNILATERAL FIXING BY A MEMBER STATE OF MAXIMUM PRICES FOR A PRODUCT COVERED BY A COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE BASIC REGULATION "WHATEVER THE MARKETING STAGE IN QUESTION" IN SO FAR AS IT JEOPARDIZES THE OBJECTIVES OR THE FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATION, IN PARTICULAR ITS SYSTEM OF PRICES . IT IS NONE THE LESS APPROPRIATE TO NOTE THAT IN THOSE CASES NEITHER THE QUESTIONS ASKED BY THE NATIONAL COURT NOR THE WORDING OF THE NATIONAL PROVISIONS IN QUESTION IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS ALLOWED A DISTINCTION TO BE DRAWN IN RELATION TO THE DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL STAGES INVOLVED . THE FACT THAT THE ANALYSIS OF THE COMPATIBILITY OF NATIONAL RULES ON PRICE FORMATION WITH COMMUNITY LAW CONTAINED IN THE JUDGMENTS CONCERNED DOES NOT DRAW A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL STAGES SHOULD NOT THEREFORE BE INTERPRETED AS AMENDING THE CASE-LAW WHICH, FOR THE REST, APPEARS TO BE CONSISTENT .
9 IT FOLLOWS FROM THE ABOVE CONSIDERATIONS THAT THE EFFECT OF REGULATIONS NOS 121/67 AND 805/68 WAS THAT MEMBER STATES NO LONGER HAD THE POWER TO INTRODUCE OR TO CONTINUE TO APPLY LEGISLATION PROHIBITING THE RAISING OF WHOLESALE PRICES FOR PIGMEAT AND BEEF AND VEAL .
10 IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT, AS REGARDS WHOLESALE PRICES FOR PIGMEAT AND BEEF AND VEAL, THE COMMUNITY HAS THE EXCLUSIVE LEGISLATIVE POWER WHICH PRECLUDES ANY ACTION ON THE MATTER BY A MEMBER STATE, IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO EXAMINE THE QUESTION WHETHER SUCH NATIONAL RULES DO OR DO NOT JEOPARDIZE THE OBJECTIVES OR THE FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATION IN THE SECTORS UNDER CONSIDERATION; SUCH AN EXAMINATION IS NECESSARY, HOWEVER, WHEN NATIONAL MEASURES ARE ADOPTED IN RESPECT OF RETAIL OR CONSUMER PRICES AND ARE THUS IN A FIELD WHICH DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE EXCLUSIVE POWERS OF THE COMMUNITY .
11 THE NATIONAL COURT ALSO ASKS WHETHER THE COMPATIBILITY OF NATIONAL RULES CONCERNING THE FREEZING OF WHOLESALE PRICES OF PIGMEAT AND BEEF AND VEAL MUST BE ASSESSED DIFFERENTLY WHEN THESE RULES CONTAIN A REVISION CLAUSE THE PRECISE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO ALIGN THE FROZEN PRICES ON THOSE FIXED BY VIRTUE OF THE COMMUNITY REGULATIONS . IT FOLLOWS FROM THE FOREGOING THAT THE REPLY TO THIS QUESTION MUST BE IN THE NEGATIVE SINCE THE CLAUSE TO WHICH THE NATIONAL COURT REFERS CANNOT JUSTIFY ACTION BY A MEMBER STATE IN A FIELD WHERE THE COMMUNITY HAS EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION .
12 CONSEQUENTLY, IT SHOULD BE RULED IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO THE COURT THAT REGULATIONS NOS 121/67 AND 805/68 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS PROHIBITING MEMBER STATES