CELEX: C1999/020/01
Language: en
Date: 1999-01-23 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber) of 12 November 1998 in Case C-102/96: Commission of the European Communities v. Federal Republic of Germany (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directives 64/433/EEC, 91/497/EEC and 89/662/EEC - Requirement for special marking and heat treatment of meat from boars)

23.1.1999            EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                   C 20/1
                                                                 I
                                                           (Information)
                                             COURT OF JUSTICE
                                                       COURT OF JUSTICE
              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                  Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its
                                                                     obligations under Article 5(1)(o) and Article 6(1)(b) of
                      (Sixth Chamber)                                Council Directive 64/433/EEC of 26 June 1964 on health
                                                                     problems affecting intra-Community trade in fresh meat
                   of 12 November 1998
                                                                     (OJ, English Special Edition 1963Ð1964, p. 185), as
      in Case C-102/96: Commission of the European                   reenacted by Council Directive 91/497/EEC of 29 July
      Communities v. Federal Republic of Germany (1)                 1991 (OJ L 268, 24.9.1991, p. 69), in conjunction with
                                                                     Articles 5(1), 7 and 8 of Council Directive 89/662/EEC of
(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations Ð               11 December 1989 concerning veterinary checks in
Directives 64/433/EEC, 91/497/EEC and 89/662/EEC Ð                   intra-Community trade with a view to the completion of
Requirement for special marking and heat treatment of                the internal market (OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 13) and
                      meat from boars)                               under Article 30 of the EC Treaty Ð the Court (Sixth
                                                                     Chamber), composed of: G. Hirsch, President of the
                       (1999/C 20/01)                                Second Chamber, acting as President of the Sixth
                                                                     Chamber, G. F. Mancini, J. L. Murray (Rapporteur), H.
                                                                     Ragnemalm and K. M. Ioannou, Judges; A. La Pergola,
                                                                     Advocate-General; H. A. Rühl, Principal Administrator,
              (Language of the case: German)                         for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 12 November
                                                                     1998, in which it:
 (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be        1. Declares that, by imposing the obligation of marking
         published in the European Court Reports)                        the carcases of uncastrated male pigs and subjecting
                                                                         them to heat treatment whenever the meat, regardless
                                                                         of carcase weight, has an androstenone content of
                                                                         more than 0,5 eg/g, as shown by Professor Claus's
In Case C-102/96: Commission of the European                             modified enzyme immunoassay, and by regarding the
Communities (Agent: Klaus-Dieter Borchardt) v. Federal                   meat as giving off a pronounced sexual odour and
Republic of Germany (Agents: Ernst Röder and Bernd                       consequently unfit for human consumption if the
Kloke) Ð application for a declaration that, by imposing                 threshold of 0,5 eg/g of androstenone is exceeded, the
the obligation of marking the carcases of uncastrated male               Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its
pigs and subjecting them to heat treatment whenever the                  obligations under Articles 5(1)(o) and 6(1)(b) of
meat, regardless of carcase weight, has an androstenone                  Council Directive 64/433/EEC of 26 June 1964 on
content of more than 0,5 eg/g, as shown by Professor                     health problems affecting intra-Community trade in
Claus's modified enzyme immunoassay, and by regarding                    fresh meat, as reenacted by Council Directive
the meat as giving off a pronounced sexual odour and                     91/497/EEC of 29 July 1991, and under Articles 5(1),
consequently unfit for human consumption if the                          7 and 8 of Council Directive 89/662/EEC of
threshold of 0,5 eg/g of androstenone is exceeded, the                   11 December 1989 concerning veterinary checks in
 ---pagebreak--- C 20/2                EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                   23.1.1999
     intra-Community trade with a view to the completion             Wathelet, Judges; P. LeÂger, Advocate-General; D.
     of the internal market;                                         Louterman-Hubeau, Principal Administrator, for the
                                                                     Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 November 1998, in
                                                                     which it has ruled:
2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the
     costs.
                                                                     1. On a proper construction of Article 5, point 1, of
                                                                         the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction
(1) OJ C 158, 1.6.1996.                                                  and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and
                                                                         Commercial Matters, as amended by the Convention
                                                                         of 9 October 1978 on the accession of the Kingdom of
                                                                         Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great
                                                                         Britain and Northern Ireland, and by the Convention
                                                                         of 25 October 1982 on the accession of the Hellenic
                                                                         Republic, the court which has jurisdiction by virtue
                                                                         of that provision also has jurisdiction to order
                                                                         provisional or protective measures, without that
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                     jurisdiction being subject to any further conditions.
                    of 17 November 1998
in Case C-391/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from            2. Where the parties have validly excluded the
the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): Van Uden Maritime BV,                    jurisdiction of the courts in a dispute arising under a
trading as Van Uden Africa Line, v. Kommanditgesellschaft                contract and have referred that dispute to arbitration,
              in Firma Deco-Line and Another (1)                         no provisional or protective measures may be ordered
                                                                         on the basis of Article 5, point 1, of the Convention of
(Brussels Convention Ð Arbitration clause Ð Interim
                                                                         27 September 1968.
       payment Ð Meaning of provisional measures')
                        (1999/C 20/02)
                                                                     3. Where the subject-matter of an application for
                                                                         provisional measures relates to a question falling
                                                                         within the scope ratione materiae of the Convention of
                (Language of the case: Dutch)                            27 September 1968, that Convention is applicable and
                                                                         Article 24 thereof may confer jurisdiction on the court
                                                                          hearing that application even where proceedings have
                                                                          already been, or may be, commenced on the substance
                                                                          of the case and even where those proceedings are to be
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be            conducted before arbitrators.
          published in the European Court Reports)
                                                                     4. On a proper construction, the granting of provisional
In Case C-391/95: reference to the Court under the                        or protective measures on the basis of Article 24 of the
Protocol of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the                      Convention of 27 September 1968 is conditional on,
Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968                   inter alia, the existence of a real connecting link
on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil                 between the subject-matter of the measures sought and
and Commercial Matters from the Hoge Raad der                             the territorial jurisdiction of the Contracting State of
Nederlanden (Supreme Court of the Netherlands) for a                      the court before which those measures are sought.
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Van Uden Maritime BV, trading as Van
Uden Africa Line, and Kommanditgesellschaft in Firma                 5. Interim payment of a contractual consideration does
Deco-Line and Another Ð on the interpretation of                          not constitute a provisional measure within the
Article 1, second paragraph, point 4, Article 3, Article 5,               meaning of Article 24 of the Convention of
point 1, and Article 24 of the Convention of 27 September                 27 September 1968 unless, first, repayment to the
1968, cited above (OJ L 304, 30.10.1978, p. 17), as                       defendant of the sum awarded is guaranteed if the
amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the                        plaintiff is unsuccessful as regards the substance of his
accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the                      claim and, second, the measure sought relates only to
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland                      specific assets of the defendant located or to be
(OJ L 304, 30.10.1978, p. 1, and Ð amended text Ð                         located within the confines of the territorial
p. 77), and by the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the                   jurisdiction of the court to which application is made.
accession of the Hellenic Republic (OJ L 388, 31.12.1982,
p. 1) Ð the Court, composed of: G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias,
President, P. J. G. Kapteyn, J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch, P.         (1) OJ C 46, 17.2.1996.
Jann (Presidents of Chambers), G. F. Mancini, J. C.
Moitinho de Almeida, C. Gulmann, J. L. Murray, D. A. O.
Edward, H. Ragnemalm (Rapporteur), L. Sevón and M.