CELEX: C2005/106/06
Language: en
Date: 2005-04-30 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 March 2005 in Case C-377/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) in Léon Van Parys NV v Belgisch Interventie- en Restitutiebureau (BIRB) (Common organisation of the markets — Bananas — GATT 1994 — Articles I and XIII — Framework agreement of 23 April 1993 between the EEC and the Cartagena Group — Direct effect — Recommendations and decisions of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body — Legal effects)

30.4.2005   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 106/4
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   
   (Grand Chamber)
   of 1 March 2005
   in Case C-377/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) in Léon Van Parys NV v Belgisch Interventie- en Restitutiebureau (BIRB) (1)
   
   (Common organisation of the markets - Bananas - GATT 1994 - Articles I and XIII - Framework agreement of 23 April 1993 between the EEC and the Cartagena Group - Direct effect - Recommendations and decisions of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body - Legal effects)
   (2005/C 106/06)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   In Case C-377/02: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Raad van State (Belgium), made by decision of 7 October 2002, received at the Court on 21 October 2002, in the proceedings between Léon Van Parys NV and Belgisch Interventie- en Restitutiebureau (BIRB) — the Court: (Grand Chamber) composed of V. Skouris, President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans and A. Borg Barthet, Presidents of Chambers, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, G. Arestis, M. Ilešič, J. Malenovský, J. Klučka and U. Lõhmus,, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General, M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 1 March 2005, in which it ruled:
   
                
            
            
               In circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, an operator may not rely in proceedings before a national court on the fact that Community legislation is incompatible with certain rules of the World Trade Organisation even where the Dispute Settlement Body referred to in Article 2(1) of the Understanding on rules and procedures governing the settlement of disputes, which forms Annex 2 to the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation, approved by Council Decision 94/800/EC of 22 December 1994 concerning the conclusion on behalf of the European Community, as regards matters within its competence, of the agreements reached in the Uruguay Round multilateral negotiations (1986-1994), has declared that legislation to be incompatible with those rules.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 7 of 11.01.2003.