CELEX: 62016CN0111
Language: en
Date: 2016-02-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-111/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Udine (Italy) lodged on 24 February 2016 — Criminal proceedings against Giorgio Fidenato and Others

30.5.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 191/8
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Udine (Italy) lodged on 24 February 2016 — Criminal proceedings against Giorgio Fidenato and Others
   (Case C-111/16)
   (2016/C 191/10)
   Language of the case: Italian
   
      Referring court
   
   Tribunale di Udine
   
      Criminal proceedings against:
   
   Giorgio Fidenato, Leandro Taboga and Luciano Taboga
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               When requested to do so by a Member State, is the Commission required, for the purposes of Article 54(1) of Regulation No 178/2002, (1) to adopt emergency measures within the meaning of Article 53 of Regulation No 178/2002, even if in the Commission’s assessment in respect of certain food or feed there is no serious, evident risk to human and animal health or to the environment?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Where the Commission notifies the Member State which had sought its assessment that its assessment is at odds with the Member State’s request — an assessment which in theory precludes the need to adopt emergency measures — and where, accordingly, the Commission does not adopt such emergency measures within the meaning of Article 34 Regulation No 1829/2003 (2) as requested by that Member State, is the Member State which made the request authorised, pursuant to Article 53 of Regulation No 178/2002, to adopt interim emergency measures?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               May considerations relating to the precautionary principle which go beyond the parameters of serious and evident risk to human or animal health or the environment in the use of food or feed justify the adoption of interim emergency measures by a Member State within the meaning of Article 34 of Regulation No 1829/2003?
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Where it is clear and obvious that the European Commission has made the assessment that the substantive conditions for the adoption of emergency measures for food or feed are not met, which is later confirmed by an EFSA Scientific Opinion, and where that assessment was notified in writing to the Member State which made the request, may that Member State continue to maintain in force its existing interim emergency measures and/or extend the validity of such interim emergency measures, when the interim period for which they were put in place has expired?
            
         
      (1)  Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (OJ 2002 L 31, p. 1).
   
      (2)  Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed (OJ 2003 L 268, p. 1).