CELEX: C1997/026/08
Language: en
Date: 1997-01-25 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT of 26 November 1996 in Case C-68/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hessischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof): T. Port GmbH & Co. KG v. Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung (Bananas - Common organization of the markets - Import rules - Cases of hardship - Assessment of validity - Interim measures)

25 . 1 . 97             1 EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                     No C 26/5
       postponed to another date at the will of the transferor                          JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
       or transferee.                                                                          of 26 November 1996
                                                                        in Case C-68/95 ( reference for a preliminary ruling from
(!) OJ No C 386, 31 . 12. 1994 .                                        the Hessischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof): T. Port GmbH &c
( 2 ) OJ No L 61 , 5 . 3 . 1977, p . 26.                                Co .    KG     v.    Bundesanstalt     fur  Landwirtschaft  und
                                                                                                    Ernahrung ( 1 )
                                                                        (Bananas — Common organization of the markets —
                                                                        Import rules — Cases of hardship — Assessment of
                                                                                            validity — Interim measures)
                                                                                                     ( 97/C 26/08 )
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                    (Language of the case: German)
                             (Fifth Chamber)
                         of 14 November 1996                               (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
                                                                                  published in the European Court Reports)
in Case C-333/94 P: Tetra Pak International SA v.
          Commission of the European Communities 0 )                    In Case C-68/95 : reference to the Court pursuant to
                                                                        Article 177 of the EC Treaty from the Hessischer
 (Appeal — Competition — Dominant position —                            Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Higher Administrative Court,
Definition of the product markets — Application of                      Hesse ), Germany, for a preliminary ruling in the
Article 86 of the Treaty to practices carried out by a                  proceedings pending before that court between T. Port
 dominant undertaking on a market distinct from the                     GmbH & Co . KG and Bundesanstalt fur Landwirtschaft
 dominated market — Tied sales — Predatory prices —                      und Ernahrung, supported by Federal Republic of
                                    Fine)
                                                                         Germany — on the interpretation of Articles 16 and 30 of
                               ( 971C 26/07)                             Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 404/93 of 13 February
                                                                         1993 on the common organization of the market in
                                                                         bananas (2 ), on the validity of Article 19 of that
                                                                         Regulation and on the interpretation of the EC Treaty,
                  (Language of the case: English)                        with particular regard to a national court's power to order
                                                                         interim measures until rules dealing with cases of hardship
                                                                         are adopted — the Court, composed of: G. C. Rodriguez
 In Case C-333/94 P: Tetra Pak International SA, whose                   Iglesias, President, G. F. Mancini, J. C. Moitinho de
 seat is in Pully, Switzerland, represented by Michel                    Almeida ( Rapporteur ), J. L. Murray and L. Sevón
 Waelbroeck and Alexandre Vandencasteele, of the Brussels                ( Presidents of Chambers ), C. N. Kakouris, P. J. G.
 Bar, and by Vivien Rose, Barrister, with an address for                 Kapteyn, C. Gulmann, D. A. O. Edward, J. -P. Puissochet,
 service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Ernest Arendt,                 G. Hirsch, P. Jann and H. Ragnemalm, Judges; M. B.
  8—10 rue Mathias Hardt — appeal against the judgment                   Elmer, Advocate-General; H. von Holstein , Deputy
  of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber ) of                    Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
  6 October 1994 in Case T-83/91 Tetra Pak v. Commission                 26 November 1996, in which it has ruled :
  [1994] ECR 11-755, seeking to have that judgment set
  aside — the other party to the proceedings being: the                   1 . Article 16 (3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93
  Commission of the European Communities (Agent: Julian                       of 13 February 1993 on the common organization of
  Currall, assisted by Nicholas Forwood QC ) — the Court                      the market in bananas does not allow the Commission
  (Fifth Chamber), composed of: L. Sevón, President of the                    to lay down rules catering for cases of hardship arising
  First Chamber, acting for the President of the Fifth                        from the fact that importers of third-country bananas
  Chamber, C. Gulmann, D. A. O. Edward, J. -P. Puissochet                     or non-traditional ACP bananas meet difficulties
  and P. Jann ( Rapporteur ), Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo                          threatening their existence when an exceptionally low
  Colomer, Advocate-General; L. Hewlett, Administrator,                       quota was allocated to them on the basis of the
  for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 14 November                      reference years to be taken into consideration pursuant
   1996 , in which it:                                                        to Article 19 (2) of the Regulation.
                                                                              Article 30 of Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 authorizes
   1 . Dismisses the appeal.                                                  and, depending on the circumstances, requires the
                                                                               Commission to lay down rules catering for cases of
                                                                               hardship arising from the fact that importers of third-
   2 . Orders the appellant to pay the costs.                                  country bananas or non-traditional ACP bananas
                                                                               meet difficulties threatening their existence when an
                                                                               exceptionally low quota has been allocated to them on
   (') OJ No C 386 , 31 . 12 . 1994 .                                          the basis of the reference years to be taken into
                                                                               consideration pursuant to Article 19 (2) of that
                                                                               Regulation, where those difficulties are inherent in the
                                                                               transition from the national arrangements existing
 ---pagebreak--- No C 26 /6                EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      25 .  . 97
       before the entry into force of the Regulation to the                   on the approximation of the laws of the Member
       common organization of the market and are not                           States relating to the labelling, presentation and
       caused by a lack of care on the part of the traders                    advertising of foodstuffs for sale to the ultimate
       concerned.                                                             consumer (!), if he puts foodstuffs on the market in
                                                                              the Federal Republic of Germany which are labelled in
2 . The EC Treaty does not authorize national courts to                       Italian, French or English ?
       order provisional measures in proceedings for the
      grant of interim relief until such time as the                     2 . If not, does the trader satisfy the requirements of
       Commission has adopted an act with legal effect to                     Article 14 of Council Directive 79/ 112/EEC at least if
      deal, in accordance with Article 30 of Regulation                       he places a supplementary sign in his shop at the
       (EEC) No 404/93 , with cases of hardship affecting                     location of the goods in question, containing the
      traders .
                                                                              prescribed particulars in German ?
(!) OJ No C 119 , 13 . 5 . 1995 .
                                                                         (') OJ No L 33 , 8 . 2 . 1979 , p . 1 .
( 2 ) OJ No L 47, 25 . 2 . 1993 , p . 1 .
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal du                    Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Svea Hovratt
Travail, Charleroi, by judgment of that court of                         by order of that court of 22 November 1996 in the case of
7 November 1996 in the case of Louisette Cordelle                                      Anders Sjoberg v. Public Prosecutor
                against Office National des Pensions                                               ( Case C-387/96)
                           ( Case C-366/96 )
                                                                                                      ( 97/C 26/11 )
                              ( 97/C 26/09 )
                                                                         Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                   European Communities by an order of the Svea Hovratt
European Communities by judgment of the Tribunal du                      ( Svea Court of Appeal ) of 22 November 1996, which was
Travail ( Labour Court), Charleroi, of 7 November 1996,                  received at the Court Registry on 27 November 1996, for
received at the Court Registry on 21 November 1996, for                  a preliminary ruling in the case of Anders Sjoberg v.
a preliminary ruling in the case of Louisette Cordelle                   Public Prosecutor on the following questions:
against Office National des Pensions on the following
question:
                                                                         1 . Is the derogation contained in Article 13 ( 1 ) ( b ) of
Having regard to the benefits paid in accordance with                         Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 3820/85 of 20 December
French law by the Caisse regionale d'assurance maladie                        1985 on the harmonization of certain social legislation
Nord Picardie and to the retirement pension payable                           relating to road transport ( ! ) applicable to the services
under Belgian law, is the rule preventing the overlapping                     run by Stockholm Lan Council using SL Buss AB ?
of benefits laid down by Article 52 of the Royal Decree of
21 December 1967 applicable in the light of the                          2 . According to Article 14 ( 5 ), drivers on services
Community rules ?                                                             mentioned in paragraph ( 1 ) must carry an extract
                                                                              from the duty roster and a copy of the service
                                                                              timetable. Is it sufficient for the extract from the duty
                                                                              roster to cover only the journeys made on the day in
                                                                              question ?
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht                  (!) OJ No L 370, 31 . 12. 1985 , p. 1 .
Aachen by order of that court of 6 November 1996 in the
administrative penalty proceedings against Hermann Josef
                                 Goerres
                           ( Case C-385 /96 )
                              ( 97/C 26/ 10 )
                                                                         Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesverwal­
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                   tungsgericht by order of that court of 25 September 1996
European Communities by an order of the Amtsgericht                      in the case of Aher-Waggon GmbH against the Federal
Aachen ( Aachen Local Court) of 6 November 1996 ,                                               Republic of Germany
which was received at the Court Registry on 28 November                                            ( Case C-389/96 )
1996, for a preliminary ruling in the administrative                                                  ( 97/C 26/ 12 )
penalty proceedings against Hermann Josef Goerres on the
following questions:
                                                                         Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of
1.    Does a trader act in accordance with Article 14 of                 the European Communities by order of the Bundes­
      Council Directive 79/112/EEC of 18 December 1978                   verwaltungsgericht ( Federal Administrative Court) of