CELEX: C1996/016/15
Language: en
Date: 1996-01-20 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 23 November 1995 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Spain (Case C-361/95)

20 . 1 . 96            EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 16/7
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Pretura di               The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pordenone by order of that court of 18 October 1995 in the
 Case of Tommaso Morellato and Usl No 11 , Pordenone                 1 , declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force or,
                        ( Case C-358/95 )                                in the alternative, communicate, within the prescribed
                           ( 96/C 16/13                                  period, the laws, regulations or administrative
                                                                         provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive
                                                                         91/371 /EEC ( J ) of 20 June 1991 on the implementation
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                   of the Agreement between the European Economic
European Communities by an order of the Pretura                          Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning
( Magistrates Court), Pordenone, of 18 October 1995 ,                    direct insurance other than life assurance, the Kingdom
which was received at the Court Registry on 21 November                  of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under
1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of Tommaso                   Articles 5 and 189 of the Treaty establishing the
Morellato v. Usl No 11 , Pordenone :
                                                                         European Communitiy;
— are Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty establishing the EEC
                                                                     2 , order the defendant to pay the costs .
    to be interpreted as precluding the Italian legislation on
    the working and marketing of cereals, flour, bread and
    pasta ( Law No 480 of 4 July 1967), in so far as such            Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    legislation prohibits the sale of deep-frozen special
    wholemeal bread having:                                          The mandatory nature of the third paragraph of Article 189
                                                                     and the first paragraph of Article 5 of the EC Treaty requires
    — a moisture content in excess of the percentages                Member States to adopt the appropriate measures in order
         referred to in Article 16 ,                                 to ensure compliance with the obligations stemming from
    — an ash content lower than that prescribed by                   the Directives, observing the time limits laid down therein .
         Article 16 in conjunction with Article 7 ( 3 ),             That period expired on 4 July 1993 without the Kingdom of
                                                                     Spain having brought into force the necessary provisions.
    — an admixture of bran, which is not a permitted
         ingredient,                                                 (') OJ No L 205 , 27. 7. 1991 , p . 48 .
    accordingly, are those legislative provisions to be
    regarded as a quantitative restriction or a measure
    having equivalent effect thereto within the meaning of
    Article 30 ?
— In the event of an affirmative answer to that question, is         Action brought on 23 November 1995 by the Commission
    the Italian State, in circumstances such as those of this        of the European Communities against the Kingdom of
    case, entitled to rely on the derogation provided for in                                        Spain
    Article 36 of the EC Treaty, for the purpose of protecting
    public health ?                                                                          Case C-361/95 )
                                                                                               ( 96/C 16/15 )
— Is the Italian legislation to be disapplied by the Italian
    courts ?
                                                                     An action against the Kingdom of Spain was brought before
                                                                     the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
— Is the free movement on Italian territory of bread                 23 November 1995 by the Commission of the European
    produced in France and described as aforesaid to be              Communities, represented by D. Gouloussis and B. Vila
    permitted ?                                                      Costa, acting as Agents, with an address for service in
                                                                     Luxembourg at the office of C. Gômez de la Cruz, Wagner
                                                                     Centre, Kirchberg Plateau .
                                                                     The applicant claims that the Court should :
Action brought on 23 November 1995 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of
                                Spain
                                                                     1 , declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force or,
                                                                         in the alternative, communicate, within the prescribed
                        ( Case C-360/95                                  period, the laws, regulations or administrative
                           ( 96/C 16/14 )                                provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive
                                                                         92/49/EEC (*) of 18 June 1992 on the coordination of
An action against the Kingdom of Spain was brought before                laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on                      to direct insurance other than life assurance, the
23 November 1995 by the Commission of the European                       Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations
Communities, represented by D. Gouloussis and B. Vila                    under Articles 5 and 189 of the Treaty establishing the
Costa, acting as Agents, with an address for service in                  European Community;
Luxembourg at the office of C. Gomez de la Cruz, Wagner
Centre, Kirchberg Plateau .                                          2 , order the defendant to pay the costs .
 ---pagebreak--- No C 16/8             | EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                    20 . 1 . 96
The pleas in law and main arguments are analogous with                 failed to give any consideration at all to one of the
those of Case C-360/95 (2 ). The time limit for transposition          appellants' claims.
expired on 31 December 1993 .
                                                                       In particular, in relation to the matters of fact found by the
f 1 ) OJ No L 228 , 11 . 8 . 1992 , p . 1 .                            Court of First Instance in its judgment, the appellants'
( 2 ) See page 7 of this Official Journal .                            appeal is based on the errors of law committed by the Court
                                                                       of First Instance in that connection — the obvious
                                                                       substantive inaccuracy of findings, the misuse of evidence,
                                                                       the failure to apply properly the rules and principles relating
                                                                       to the burden of proof.
Appeal brought on 27 November 1995 by ( 1 ) Blackspur
DIY Ltd, ( 2 ) Steven Kellar, ( 3 ) J. M. A. Glancy, (4 ) Ronald       The appellants contend that underlying the Court of First
Cohen against the judgment delivered on 18 September                   Instance's judgment was a basic error ( or series of errors ) of
1995 by the First Chamber ( extended composition ) of the              law concerning the correct legal test of causation.
Court of First Instance of the European Communities in
Case T-168/94 (') between ( 1 ) Blackspur DIY Ltd, (2 )                H OJ No C 286, p . 13 .
Steven Kellar, ( 3 ) J. M. A. Glancy, (4 ) Ronald Cohen and ( 1 )
Council of the European Union, ( 2 ) Commission of the
                      European Communities
                         ( Case C-362/95 P                             Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura
                             ( 96/C 16/16                              circondariale di Roma — Sezione distaccata di Tivoli by
                                                                       order of that court of 8 November 1995 in criminal
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 18 September                          proceedings against Giuseppe Tancredi
1995 by the First Chamber ( extended composition ) of the                                       Case C-363/95 )
Court of First Instance of the European Communities in                                             ( 96/C 16/17)
Case T-168/94 between ( 1 ) Blackspur DIY Ltd, ( 2 ) Steven
Kellar, ( 3 ) J. M. A. Glancy, ( 4 ) Ronald Cohen and ( 1 )            Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
Council of the European Union, ( 2 ) Commission of the                 European Communities by order of the Pretura
European Communities, was brought before the Court of                  circondariale di Roma — Sezione distaccata di Tivoli ( Rome
Justice of the European Communities on 27 November                     District Magistrate's Court, Tivoli Division ) of 8 November
1995 by ( 1 ) Blackspur DIY Ltd, ( 2 ) Steven Kellar, ( 3 ) J. M.      1995 , which was received at the Court Registry on
A. Glancy, (4 ) Ronald Cohen, represented by K. P. E. Lasok,           27 November 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in criminal
QC, instructed by Charles Khan of Berg & Co., Solicitors,              proceedings against Giuseppe Tancredi .
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers
of Maria Dennewald, 12, avenue de la Porte Neuve .                     The questions referred by the Pretura circondariale di Roma
                                                                       — Sezione distaccata di Tivoli to the Court of Justice for a
The appellants request the Court to order that:                        preliminary ruling are identical with those in Case
                                                                       C-58/95 ( M.
( a ) the decision of the Court of First Instance be set
       aside;                                                          (') OJ No C 119 , 13 . 5 . 1995 , p . 6 .
( b ) the case be remitted to the Court of First Instance;
        and
(c ) the Council and the Commission pay the Appellants'                Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
       costs .
                                                                       Hamburg by orders of 22 September 1995 and
                                                                       27 September 1995 in the cases of Firma T. Port GmbH &
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                                   Co. v. Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas
The appellants submit that the judgment of the Court of                               ( Cases C-364/95 and C-365/95 )
First Instance is vitiated by errors of law. These errors of law                                   ( 96/C 16/18 )
comprise infringement of the Appellants' right to a fair trial,
as understood in the context of Article 6 of the Convention
                                                                       Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental                     European Communities by orders of the Joint Senate of the
Freedoms, the rights of defence and general principles of              Finanzgericht Hamburg ( Finance Court, Hamburg) for
 Community law.                                                        the Länder of the Free Hanseatic City of Hamburg,
The appellants did not benefit from a fair trial for various           Lower Saxony and Schleswig-Holstein, Fourth Senate, of
 reasons : the Court of First Instance's judgment is riddled           22 September and 27 September 1995 , which were received
with suggestio falsi and suppressio veri in relation both to           at the Court Registry on 16 November 1995 , for a
 the nature of the appellants' case and the evidence and               preliminary ruling in the case of Firma T. Port GmbH
 sources of evidence available to the Court of First Instance;          & Co. v. Hauptzollamt ( Principal Customs Office )
 the Court of First Instance misused the evidence before it            Hamburg-Jonas on the first, second and third questions in
 and refrained from ordering measures of enquiry even                   Case C- 1 82/95 ( M.
 though it was appropriate to do so; the Court of First
                                                                        0 ) OJ No C 208 , 12 . 8 . 1995 , p . 12 .
 Instance failed to give any or any sufficient reasons for a
 number of its conclusions; and the Court of First Instance