CELEX: C2003/070/29
Language: en
Date: 2003-03-22 00:00:00
Title: Case C-49/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour d'Appel de Rennes, Septième Chambre by judgment of that Court of 5 February 2003 in the case of Alain Rousseau against Association Comité Économique Régional Fruits et Légumes de Bretagne (CERAFEL)

C 70/18                 EN                      Official Journal of the European Union                                      22.3.2003
The Applicant submits that the documents communicated to                Action brought on 10 February 2003 by the Commission
the Commission constituted an application for final payment             of the European Communities against the Portuguese
in accordance with Article 52(5) and that in concluding to the                                        Republic
contrary the Commission erred in law and/or made a manifest
error of assessment.
                                                                                                   (Case C-48/03)
It is also submitted that the Commission’s interpretation of the                                   (2003/C 70/28)
Regulation infringes the principles of legal certainty and of
proportionality.
                                                                        An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought
                                                                        before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
The Applicant submits that if the Commission’s interpretation           10 February 2003 by the Commission of the European
of Article 52(5) of the Regulation and/or the Annex to its              Communities, represented by Ana Maria Alves Vieira, acting
Decision C(92) 1358/8 is correct, the absolute nature of those          as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg.
provisions is contrary to the principle of proportionality.
Furthermore, those provisions contravene the principle of
legal certainty in that they are not sufficiently clearly and           The applicant claims that the Court should:
precisely drafted and that, in these circumstances, it is submit-
ted that, by virtue of Article 241 EC, the provisions of the            —     Declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force
Regulation and the Decision are inapplicable against the United               within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and
Kingdom.                                                                      administrative provisions necessary to comply with
                                                                              Directive 2000/16/EC (1) of the European Parliament and
                                                                              the Council of 10 April 2000 amending Council Directive
The Applicant maintains that the decision of the Commission                   79/373/EEC on the marketing of compound feedingstuffs
contained in its letter of 22 November 2002 does not disclose                 and Council Directive 96/25/EC on the circulation of feed
the principle issues of law and of fact upon which it is based                materials, and, in any event, by failing to inform the
and should therefore be annulled on grounds of lack of                        Commission thereof, the Portuguese Republic has failed
reasoning.                                                                    to fulfil its obligations under the abovementioned direc-
                                                                              tive;
                                                                        —     Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.
2)    T h e D eci si o n to s eek r ecov ery                  of
      9 2 7 2 76 7 E uro s of E RD F As si st an ce
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments
The Applicant submits that the decision letter of 22 November
2002 by which the Commission notified the United Kingdom                The period for transposition expired on 2 May 2001.
that it was obliged to issue a recovery order for the sum of
9 272 767 Euros should be annulled on the following grounds:
                                                                        (1 ) OJ 2000 L 105, p. 36.
—      that the Commission erred in law and/or erred in
       interpretation and/or made a manifest error of assess-
       ment;
—      that the decision contravened the principles of good
       administration, Community solidarity, regional partner-          Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour d’Appel
       ship and the principle of cooperation between Com-               de Rennes, Septième Chambre by judgment of that Court
       munity institutions and Member States (Article 10 EC);           of 5 February 2003 in the case of Alain Rousseau against
                                                                        Association Comité Économique Régional Fruits et
                                                                                        Légumes de Bretagne (CERAFEL)
—      lack of adequate reasoning.
                                                                                                   (Case C-49/03)
( 1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying
                                                                                                   (2003/C 70/29)
     down general provisions on the Structural Funds (OJ L 161,
     26.06.1999, p. 1).
                                                                        Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                        European Communities by judgment of the Cour d’Appel de
 ---pagebreak--- 22.3.2003                EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                          C 70/19
Rennes, Septième Chambre (Court of Appeal, Rennes, Seventh                    Action brought on 14 February 2003 by the Commission
Chamber) of 5 February 2003, received at the Court Registry                   of the European Communities against the French Republic
on 10 February 2003, for a preliminary ruling in the case
of Alain Rousseau against Association Comité Économique                                                (Case C-66/03)
Régional Fruits et Légumes de Bretagne (CERAFEL) on the
following questions:                                                                                   (2003/C 70/30)
                                                                              An action against the French Republic was brought before the
                                                                              Court of Justice of the European Communities on 14 February
In view of the provisions of Article 3 of Council Regulation                  2003 by the Commission of the European Communities,
No 2092/91 of 24 June 1991 (1), where a Member State                          represented by N. Yerrell, acting as Agent, with an address for
applies the provisions of Article 15b(1) and (8) of Council                   service in Luxembourg.
Regulation No 1035/72 of 18 May 1972 (2) by making certain
production and marketing rules mandatory for producers                        The Commission claims that the Court should:
established within the area of an economic committee who do
not belong to it and by making them liable for all or part of                 (a)   declare that by failing to bring into force and/or inform
the membership fees paid by producers who do belong to it,                          the Commission of the laws, regulations and administrat-
is it admissible and well founded for a farmer engaged in                           ive provisions necessary to comply with Commission
organic farming to invoke the principle of non-discrimination                       Directive 2000/39/EC of 8 June 2000 establishing a first
on the ground, in particular, that the rules prescribed by the                      list of indicative occupational exposure limit values in
economic committee in respect of market withdrawal render                           implementation of Council Directive 98/24/EC on the
its activity of little or no interest to him.                                       protection of the health and safety of workers from the
                                                                                    risks related to chemical agents at work (1) the French
                                                                                    Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC
                                                                                    Treaty, and
( 1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 of 24 June 1991 on
     organic production of agricultural products and indications              (b)   order the French Republic to pay the costs of the
     referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 198            proceedings.
     of 22.07.1991, p. 1).
( 2) Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of the Council of 18 May 1972 on
     the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables            Pleas in law and main arguments
     (OJ L 118 of 20.05.1972, p. 1).
                                                                              The period prescribed for implementation ended on 31 Decem-
                                                                              ber 2001.
                                                                              (1 ) OJ L 142, 16.06.2000, p. 47.