CELEX: C1995/174/09
Language: en
Date: 1995-07-08 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Pretura Circondariale di Genova by order of that court of 19 April 1995 in the case of Livia Balestra v. Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale (INPS) (Case C-139/95)

8 . 7 . 95                I EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                              No C 174/5
             be identified to the competent authority the names                      ( ii ) If they are to be applied by the national
             and addresses of any and all manufacturers of a                                    court, by reference to what criteria and
             particular substance ('the Substance ') from whom                                  considerations must the proportionality of the
             the applicant intends to purchase quantities of the                                requests and requirements be assessed ?
             Substance for use in the manufacture by the
             applicant of one of the active ingredients ('the
             Active Ingredient') of the Product, and to supply or         5 . Are Articles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty to be interpreted
             arrange to be supplied to the competent authority                as prohibiting requests and requirements such as those
             details of the site(s ) where the Substance would be             described above, or any of them ?
             manufactured and of the manufacturing processes
             and control testing procedures used by the                   6 . ( a ) Is Article 40 of Directive 81 /851 /EEC to be
             manufacturer of the Substance ;
                                                                                     interpreted as applying to the requests and
                                                                                     requirements described above ?
     ( b ) to require an applicant for a marketing
             authorization to submit to the competent authority
              for approval the results of such control tests as are           ( b ) If so, in what circumstances and by reference to
              required to be carried out upon each batch of the                      what criteria are the reasons for the imposition of
              Substance purchased by the applicant, and not to                       such requests, and requirements to be treated as
             release any batch of the Product until such approval                    inadequate for the purposes of Article 40 , and were
              has been given in respect of the relevant batch of the                 such requests and requirements adequately
              Substance;                                                             reasoned in the present case ?
      ( c ) to require the applicant ( whether by specific licence        7. ( a ) Is a Member State liable as a matter of Community
             conditions or by withholding grant of a marketing                       law to compensate an undertaking in damages for
              authorization or otherwise ) either to comply with                     loss which it has suffered as a consequence of the
              one or both of the above requirements or to market                     imposition of requests and requirements such as
              the Product only where it has been prepared using                      those described above which :
              supplies of the Active Ingredient purchased from a
              specified third party rather than manufactured by
              the applicant itself;                                                       ( I ) are incompatible with the provisions of
                                                                                                Directives 81 /851 /EEC and/or 81 /852/EEC ;
      ( d ) to suspend the time limits for a grant of a marketing
              authorization laid down by Article 8 of Directive                         ( ii ) infringe the principles of proportionality;
              81 /851 /EEC until the applicant has agreed to
              supply the information referred to in ( a )?                            ( iii ) are prohibited by Articles 30 to 36 of the EC
                                                                                                Treaty;
2 . Is it material to the answers in questions 1 ( a ) to ( d )
     whether the process of manufacture of the product is                             ( iv ) are insufficiently reasoned within the meaning
     continuous or other than continuous and if so what                                         of Article 40 of Directive 81 / 851 /EEC ?
     would be the effect on the answers to those
      questions ?                                                              ( b ) If the answer to question 7 ( a ) ( i ), ( ii ), ( iii ) and ( iv ) or
                                                                                      any of them is in the affirmative, under what
                                                                                     conditions does such liabilitv arise ?
3 . Would it be material to the answers to questions 1 ( a ) to
      ( d ) if it were not reasonably possible for an applicant to
      obtain any of the information referred to in question               (') OJ No L 317, 6 . 11 . 1981 , p . 1 .
       1(1 ), and if so what would be the effect on the answers           (-) OJ No L 317, 6 . 11 . 1981 , p . 16 .
      to those questions ?
4 . ( a ) If the requests for further information and the other
              requirements described in question 1 , or any of
              them, are prima facie permissible under Directives
              81 /851 /EEC and 81 /852/EEC , must such requests
              and requirements comply with the Community law
              principle of proportionality ?                              Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Pretura
                                                                          Circondariale di Genova by order of that court of 19 April
       ( b ) If the answer to ( a ) is affirmative, are those              1995 in the case of Livia Balestra v. Istituto Nazionale della
              principles to be applied in this case by the national                                 Previdenza Sociale ( INPS )
              court or by the Court of Justice ?                                                         ( Case C-139/95 )
                                                                                                           ( 95 /C 174/09 )
       (c)     ( l ) If they are to be applied by the Court of
                     Justice, do the said requests and requirements
                     or any of them infringe the principles of            Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                     proportionality ?                                     European Communities by an order of the Pretura
 ---pagebreak--- No C 174/6              EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                           8 . 7 . 95
Circondariale ( District Magistrate 's Court ), Genova , of                   public holidays , but does not prohibit working in such
19 April 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry on                   shops on those days ( and imposes the penalties of forced
2 May 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of Livia                    closure and withdrawal of their licences on shops in
Balestra v. Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale                       breach of that requirement ), constitute :
( INPS ) on the following questions :
( a ) Is it contrary to the abovementioned EEC Directives                     ( a ) a measure having an effect equivalent to a
      ( Articles 1 , 2, 3 , 4 and 5 of Council Directive                            restriction on imports within the meaning of
      79/7/EEC (') and Articles 1 , 2 and 5 of Council                              Article 30 of the Treaty of Rome and subsequent
      Directive 76/207/EEC ( 2 ) to establish different age                         rules of Community law adopted in pursuance of
      limits for the working lives of men and women for the                         the principles laid down therein; or
      purposes of entitlement to early retirement pursuant to
      Article 16 of Law No 155/81 , termination of the                        ( b ) a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised
      employment relationship and calculation of pension                            restriction on trade between Member States; or
      benefits in the event of early retirement ?
( b ) Does the different treatment, with respect to the                       ( c ) a measure which is disproportionate and
      employment relationship and social security benefits ,                        inappropriate to the socio-ethical aim pursued by
      which results from the establishment of different age                         the provision of national law; or
      limits under a legal system , such as the Italian system,
       under which the retirement age — the only age limit of                 ( d ) an infringement of Article 52 of the EC Treaty
       significance for the purposes of early retirement — is 60                    concerning freedom of establishment and of
      years of age for men and women alike, infringe the                            subsequent Community legislation enacted in
       abovementioned provisions of those Directives ?                              implementation of that principle; or
(') OJ No L 6 , 10 . 1 . 1979 , p . 24 .
(-) O J No L 39 , 14 . 2 . 1976 , p . 40 .                                    ( e ) at least an infringement of Article 2 ( 2 ) of Directive
                                                                                    64/233/EEC (') concerning the attainment of
                                                                                    freedom of establishment and freedom to provide
                                                                                    services in respect of activities in wholesale trade;
                                                                                    or
References for a preliminary ruling from the Pretura
Circondariale , Rome ( Castelnuovo di Porto Division ) by
orders of that court of 22 December 1994 in the cases of                      ( f) an infringement of Directives 83/ 189/EEC ( 2 ) and
Citta Convenienza Bergamo Sri v. ( 1 ) Mayor of the                                 88/ 182/EEC ( 3 ) concerning the elimination of
Municipality of Trezzano sul Naviglio and ( 2 ) Mayor of the                        technical barriers to trade between the Member
                      Municipality of Turin                                         States , in view of the fact that the prohibition on
                ( Cases C-145/95 and C-146/95 )
                                                                                    Sunday opening of shops is a general prohibition in
                                                                                    appearance only, but in fact is subject to
                            ( 95/C 174/ 10 )                                        exemptions for a series of products which are,
                                                                                    except in a very few unavoidable instances,
References have been made to the Court of Justice of the                            exclusively of domestic origin ?
European Communities by orders of the Pretura
Circondariale ( District Magistrate 's Court ), Rome
 ( Castelnuovo di Porto Division ) of 22 December 1994 ,                2 . If the answer to the first question, in each of its parts , is
which were received at the Court Registry on 10 May 1995                      in the affirmative, does the national measure fall within
 ( Case C-145/95 ) and 1 1 May 1995 ( Case C-146/95 ), for a                  the derogations from Article 30 provided for in
preliminry ruling in the cases of Citta Convenienza Bergamo                   Article 36 of the Treaty of Rome, or within other
 Sri v. ( 1 ) Mayor of the Municipality of Trezzano sul                       derogations provided for by Community law ?
Naviglio and ( 2 ) Mayor of the Municipality of Turin on the
 following questions :
                                                                        ( l ) OJ No 56 , 4 . 4 . 1964 , p . 863 .
 1 . Does a provision of national law which ( save for certain          ( 2 ) OJ No L 109 , 26 . 4 . 1983 , p . 8 .
      products ) requires retail shops to close on Sundays and          ( ? ) OJ No L 81 , 26 . 3 . 1988 , p . 75 .