CELEX: 61987CC0064
Language: en
Date: 1988-02-09
Title: Opinion of Mr Advocate General Darmon delivered on 9 February 1988. # NV Versele-Laga v NV Robegra. # Reference for a preliminary ruling: Vredegerecht Antwerpen (2e kanton) - Belgium. # Co-responsibility levy in the cereals sector. # Case 64/87.

Important legal notice

|

61987C0064

Opinion of Mr Advocate General Darmon delivered on 9 February 1988.  -  NV Versele-Laga v NV Robegra.  -  Reference for a preliminary ruling: Vredegerecht Antwerpen (2e kanton) - Belgium.  -  Co-responsibility levy in the cereals sector.  -  Case 64/87.  

European Court reports 1988 Page 01961

Opinion of the Advocate-General

++++Mr President,  Members of the Court,  1 . The three questions referred to the Court of Justice by the Vredegerecht ( cantonal court ) of the Second Canton of the City of Antwerp relate to Commission Regulation No 2040/86, ( 1 ) certain aspects of which have been the subject of other Opinions delivered by me earlier today . The third question concerning the validity of the regulation is put solely in the event that the Court' s reply to the second question should be in the negative .  2 . In essence, the questions put by the Vredegerecht relate to the conversion rate to be applied in calculating the co-responsibility levy which, under Article 1 of Commission Regulation No 2040/86 implementing Article 4 of Council Regulation No 2727/75, ( 2 ) as amended by Council Regulation No 1579/86 ( 3 ) is payable by operators undertaking the "first-stage processing" of cereals .  3 . In my view, the replies to be given to those questions are relatively straightforward . Since the levy must be paid to the competent national body by the operator undertaking first-stage processing, the conversion rate applicable can be none other than the conversion rate applicable in the State where the processing takes place . In other words, the amount of the levy laid down by Council Regulation No 1584/86 of 23 May 1986 ( 4 ) for the 1986/87 marketing year, namely ECU 5.38 per tonne, must necessarily be converted into the currency of the State where the processing takes place at the agricultural conversion rate applicable in that State .  4 . As regards the second question, it is essentially concerned with Article 5 of Commission Regulation No 2040/86 and, more specifically, with whether that provision means that the whole co-responsibility levy must be passed on by processors to their suppliers . To my mind, the reply to this question is also clear . In view of the fact that under the Community rules in force the levy is to be neutral in its effect the only possibility is that the whole of the levy must be passed on .  5 . I therefore conclude that the Court should rule as follows :  The co-responsibility levy in the cereals sector must be calculated on the basis of the agricultural conversion rate applicable in the State where first processing takes place;  The whole co-responsibility levy must be passed on by processors to their suppliers .  (*) Translated from the French .  ( 1 ) Commission Regulation ( EEC ) No 2040/86 of 30 June 1986 laying down detailed rules for the application of the co-responsibility levy in the cereals sector ( Official Journal 1986 L 173, p . 65 ).  ( 2 ) Regulation ( EEC ) No 2727/75 of the Council of 29 October 1975 on the common organization of the market in cereals ( Official Journal 1975 L 281, p . 1 ).  ( 3 ) Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 1579/86 of 23 May 1986 amending Regulation ( EEC ) No 2727/75 on the common organization of the market in cereals ( Official Journal 1986 L 139, p . 29 ).  ( 4 ) Official Journal 1986 L 139, p . 41 .