CELEX: C1997/040/18
Language: en
Date: 1997-02-08 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura Circondariale di Treviso, Sezione Distaccata di Conegliano, by order of that court of 2 November 1996 in the case of Galileo Zaninotto against Ispettorato Centrale Repressioni Frodi, Ufficio di Conegliano (Case C-375/96)

8 . 2. 97             1 EN |                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                     No C 40/9
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura                                down by Article 40 ( 3 ) of the EC Treaty and
Circondariale di Caserta by order of that court of                               infringement of Article 23 of Regulation ( EEC )
14 October 1996 in the case of Antonio Pontillo against                          No 441 /88 ( 4 )?
                                 Donatab
                           Case C-372/96 )                                  2 . Are the fourth indent of Article 1 ( 3 ) of Regulation
                                                                                 ( EC ) No 343/94 and Article 1 ( 1 ), ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) of
                             ( 97/C 40/ 17 )
                                                                                 Regulation ( EC ) No 465/94, as amended by
                                                                                 Regulation ( EC ) No 610/94, invalid for breach of the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                           principle of the protection of legitimate expectations ?
European Communities by order of the Pretura
Circondariale ( District Magistrates' Court ), Caserta , of                 3 . Are the fourth indent of Article 1 ( 3 ) of Regulation
14 October 1996 , received at the Court Registry on                              ( EC ) No 343/94 , and Article 1 ( 1 ), ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) of
25 November 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of                       Regulation ( EC ) No 465/94, as amended by
Antonio Pontillo against Donatab on the following                                Regulation ( EC ) No 610/94, invalid for infringement
questions :                                                                      of Article 31 of Regulation ( EEC ) No 822/87 ( 5 ) and
                                                                                 their enactment ultra vires for failure to meet the legal
1 . In the light of the principle of the protection of                           requirement of an accurate determination of the 'yield
      legitimate expectations and of the rationale underlying                    per hectare '?
     the quota system, is Council Regulation ( EEC )
      No 1738/91 (') to be regarded as valid, in so far as it               4 . Is Article 39 (4 ) of Regulation ( EEC ) No 822/87
      unexpectedly and unpreditably reduced the prices and                       invalid for breach of the principle of proportionality in
     the processing premium for tobacco of the variety                           so far as it prescribes, in the case of each producer
      known as Burley I ( Italian ) at such a late stage in the                  subject to the obligation , the volume to be distilled, a
     tobacco crop year that even most prudent and alert                          wholly inappropriate means of attaining the objective
     growers were left with no room for manoeuvre ?                              sought ?
2 . Is the fact that Regulation ( EEC ) No 1738/91 fails to                 5 . Is the fourth indent of Article 4 ( 2 ) of Regulation
      give any reasons at all , whether express or implied , for                  ( EEC ) No 441 /88 invalid for exceeding the limits on
      its provisions concerning Burley I tobacco — which                         the exercise of administrative discretion in delimiting
      was more seriously affected than other tobacco                             regions for the purposes of the common organization
      varieties even though excess production of those                           of the markets ?
      varieties had been even higher — open to criticism in
      that it constitutes a breach of essential procedural                  6 . Is Article 1 ( 1 ) of Regulation ( EC ) No 3151 /94 ( 6 )
      requirements ?                                                              invalid for infringement of Article 39 ( 1 ) of Regulation
                                                                                  ( EEC ) No 822/87 inasmuch as it fails to meet the legal
(') OJ No L 163 , 26 . 6 . 1991 , p . 13 .                                        requirement of serving to restore market stability in
                                                                                 the current wine year ?
                                                                            7. Is Article 1 ( 1 ) of Regulation ( EC ) No 3151 /94 invalid
                                                                                  because it contravenes the principle of proportionality
                                                                                  with which Community policy should be consistent ?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura
Circondariale        di    Treviso ,       Sezione    Distaccata     di
                                                                             ')  OJ  No  L  44, 17 . 2 . 1994, p . 9 .
Conegliano, by order of that court of 2 November 1996                        2)  OJ  No  L  58 , 2 . 3 . 1994 , p . 2 .
in the case of Galileo Zaninotto against Ispettorato                         ')  OJ  No  I. 77, 19 . 3 . 1994 , p . 12 .
        Centrale Repressioni Frodi, Ufficio di Conegliano                    4)  OJ  No  L  45 , 18 . 2 . 1988 , p . 15 .
                          ( Case C-375 /96 )                                 ■') OJ  No  L  84, 27 . 3 . 1987, p . 1 .
                                                                             ") OJ   No  L  332 , 22 . 12 . 1994 , p . 32 .
                              ( 97/C 40/ 18 )
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European        Communities         by     order   of    the  Pretura
Circondariale ( District Magistrates' Court ), Treviso —
Sezione Distaccata di Conegliano ( Conegliano Section ) —                   Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal de
of 2 November 1996 , received at the Court Registry on                      Premiere Instance de Huy on a judgment of the Tribunal
26 November 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of                  Correctionnel de Huy of 29 October 1996 in the criminal
Galileo Zaninotto against Ispettorato Centrale Repressioni                  proceedings pending before that court in the case of
Frodi , Ufficio di Conegliano, on the following questions:                  Ministere Public against B. Leloup, S. Leloup and Sofrage
                                                                                                                    Sari
 1 . Are the fourth indent of Article 1 ( 3 ) of Regulation                                                Case C-376/96 )
       ( EC ) No 343/94 ('), and Article 1 ( 1 ) ( c ), Article 1 ( 2 ),
                                                                                                              97/C 40/ 19
       second subparagraph, and Article 1 ( 3 ) ( Annex,
       concerning Region 4 ) of Regulation ( EC ) No
       465/94 ( 2 ), as amended by Regulation ( EC ) No                     Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
       610/94 (■*) so far as concerns Region 4 , invalid for                European Communities by judgment of the Tribunal
       breach of the principle of non-discrimination laid                    Correctionnel ( Criminal Court ), Huy, of 29 October 1996 ,