CELEX: C2002/247/08
Language: en
Date: 2002-10-12 00:00:00
Title: Case C-286/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di Treviso, Prima Sezione by order of that Court of 26 June 2002 in the case of Bellio F. lli S.r.l. against Prefettura di Treviso

C 247/4                 EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                   12.10.2002
2.     If so, can such an objection be raised not only by the              Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di
       authority of destination but also by the authority of               Treviso, Prima Sezione by order of that Court of 26 June
       dispatch?                                                           2002 in the case of Bellio F. lli S.r.l. against Prefettura di
                                                                                                       Treviso
3.     If so, is the authority of dispatch entitled to base its
       assessment of whether the planned recovery of the waste
       at the place of destination is compatible with health and
       environmental imperatives on the standards applicable in
       the State of dispatch even where they are higher than the                                   (Case C-286/02)
       standards applicable in the State of destination?
4.     Under the second indent of Article 7(4)(a) of Regulation
       No 259/93, can an objection to the shipment of waste                                        (2002/C 247/08)
       for recovery be raised on the ground that the planned
       recovery contravenes national laws and regulations relat-
       ing to environmental protection, public order, public
       safety or health protection?
5.     If so, can the authority of dispatch raise such an objection
       on the ground that the recovery contravenes national
       laws and regulations in force at the place of dispatch?
                                                                           Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                           European Communities by order of the Tribunale di Treviso,
                                                                           Prima Sezione (District Court, Treviso, First Chamber) of
                                                                           26 June 2002, received at the Court Registry on 5 August
                                                                           2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Bellio F. lli S.r.l.
                                                                           against Prefettura di Treviso on the following questions:
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsge-
richt Minden by order of that Court of 26 July 2002                        1.   Are the first indent of Article 2(2) of Council Decision
in the case of Edeltraud Elsner-Lakeberg against Land                           2000/766 ( 1) and Article 1(1) of Commission Decision
                       Nordrhein-Westfalen                                      2001/9 ( 2), read together with the other Community rules
                                                                                on which those provisions are based, to be interpreted as
                          (Case C-285/02)                                       meaning that the accidental presence of an unforeseen or
                                                                                prohibited substance in fish flour used in the production
                                                                                of feed-stuffs for animals other than ruminants may be
                          (2002/C 247/07)                                       considered both legally and materially acceptable and
                                                                                that, accordingly, traders are allowed a reasonable margin
                                                                                of error?
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Verwaltungsgericht
Minden (Administrative Court, Minden) of 26 July 2002,                     2.   In the affirmative, in the light of the principle of
received at the Court Registry on 2 August 2002, for a                          proportionality and the principle of precaution, and in
preliminary ruling in the case of Edeltraud Elsner-Lakeberg                     consideration of the Community provisions applicable in
against Land Nordrhein-Westfalen on the following question:                     the domains in which reference is made to accidental
                                                                                contamination of food-industry products and indications
                                                                                are given of relevant margins of error, does an accidental
Is it compatible with Article 141 EC in conjunction with                        contamination of 0.1 %, and in any case of not more
Council Directive 75/117/EEC of 10 February 1975 ( 1) on the                    than 0,5 %, of fragments of mammalian bone in fish flour
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to                      intended for the production of feed-stuffs for animals
the application of the principle of equal pay for men and                       other than ruminants warrant the adoption of a draconian
women that men and women teachers, part-time as well as                         sanction such as the complete destruction of that fish
full-time, who are officials in the Land North-Rhine Westphalia                 flour?
are not granted remuneration for excess hours worked if that
additional work does not exceed three teaching periods in the
calendar month?
                                                                           3.   Does the exclusion of any margin of error in relation to
                                                                                the presence of the substances mentioned in the preceding
( 1) OJ L 45, p. 19.
                                                                                questions amount to the introduction of a technical
                                                                                standard within the meaning of Directive 83/189 ( 3) (as
                                                                                amended) which would have to be notified in advance to
                                                                                the European Commission?
 ---pagebreak--- 12.10.2002              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 247/5
4.    Are the provisions of Article 28 and 30 EC on the free             Pleas in law and main arguments
      movement of goods, applicable to Norway on the basis
      of Articles 8 to 16 of the European Economic Area
      Agreement (EEA Agreement), to be interpreted, with                 According to the Commission, current Greek legislation is not
      reference to the provisions contained in Council Decision          consistent with Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92. The fact that
      2000/766/EC and Commission Decision 2001/9 cited in                the regulation is of direct application and its provisions prevail
      question (1) above, as meaning that a Member State may             over national law does not release Member States from the
      not impose a requirement of zero error in a situation              obligation to repeal national provisions incompatible with
      such as that described in questions (1) and (2) above?             Community law.
( 1) OJ L 306 of 7.12.2000, p. 32.                                       As regards the classification of the ports of the Peloponnese as
( 2) OJ L 2 of 5.1.2001, p. 32.                                          island ports, the Commission points out that the Peloponnese
( 3) OJ L 109 of 26.4.1983, p. 8.                                        is separated from the rest of Greece by a man-made canal and
                                                                         is linked by road and rail with the rest of the country. It
                                                                         therefore accords with common sense, and also with the case-
                                                                         law of the Court of Justice (see Joined Cases C-15/98 and
                                                                         C-105/99 Italy and Sardegna Lines v Commission [2000] ECR
                                                                         I-8855, paragraph 55), for the Peloponnese to be considered
                                                                         part of mainland Greece.
Action brought on 9 August 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic
                                                                         Finally, as regards island cabotage, the Commission submits
                                                                         that, while host State rules apply for regulating manning-
                          (Case C-288/02)                                related issues, those rules must not, however, in any event be
                                                                         contrary to Article 49 of the EC Treaty.
                          (2002/C 247/09)
                                                                         (1 ) OJ L 364, 12.12.1992, p. 7.
An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 9 August
2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by K. Simonsson and M. Patakia, Legal Advisers,
with an address for service in Luxembourg. The applicant
claims that the Court should declare that by:                            Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Royal Court of
                                                                         Jersey, Samedi Division, by order of that court dated
—     expressly conferring the right to carry passengers between         5 August 2002, in the case of Jersey Produce Marketing
      Greek mainland ports solely upon Greek passenger ships             Organisation Ltd against 1) The States of Jersey and
      and the right to carry out tours with passenger ships of a         2) Jersey Potato Export Marketing Board, Interveners:
      gross tonnage exceeding 650 gt by way of island cabotage                 1) Top Produce Limited and 2) Fairview Farm Ltd
      solely upon Greek passenger ships,
—     requiring in the case of Community ships entered in a                                        (Case C-293/02)
      second or international register a certificate from the
      competent authority of the flag State declaring that that                                    (2002/C 247/10)
      ship is allowed to provide cabotage services,
—     considering that the Peloponnese constitues an island,
      and                                                                Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                         European Communities by an order of the Royal Court of
—     applying to Community tankers, freighters, passenger               Jersey, Samedi Division, dated 5 August 2002, which was
      ships and tourist ships, and to cruise ships which carry           received at the Court Registry on 13 August 2002, for a
      out sea tours by way of island cabotage its rules as host          preliminary ruling in the case of Jersey Produce Marketing
      State relating to manning conditions, and requiring the            Organisation Ltd against 1) The States of Jersey and 2) Jersey
      shipowners to submit an application to the competent               Potato Export Marketing Board, Interveners: 1) Top Produce
      authorities for measurement of the gross tonnage of the            Limited and 2) Fairview Farm Ltd, on the following questions:
      ship, in order for the Greek authorities to calculate the
      basic composition of the crew,                                     1.     Is a statutory Scheme such as that which regulates the
                                                                                export of potatoes from Jersey to the United Kingdom to
the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under                be considered as a measure having an effect equivalent to
Articles 1, 3 and 6 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92                      quantitative restrictions on exports, contrary to Article 29
of 7 December 1992 (1) applying the principle of freedom to                     EC, by reason of the fact that potatoes sent directly from
provide services to maritime transport within Member States                     Jersey to the United Kingdom may travel via another
(maritime cabotage).                                                            Member State but without leaving the carrying vessel?