Agrargenossenschaft Alkersleben eG v Freistaat Thüringen.
Date: 2003-05-08
25.  It must be pointed out, first, that the general scheme of the provisions concerning the additional levy on milk shows that a reference quantity can be allocated to a farmer only if he has the status of a producer (judgments in   Ballmann  , cited above, paragraph 9, and in Case C-401/99   Thomsen   [2002] ECR I-5775, paragraph 32).
30.  It is apparent from those definitions read together that, first of all, the status of producer is accorded to any person who manages a set of production units located within the geographical territory of a Member State and sells or delivers milk or milk products, and that it is not necessary for the farmer to own the production facilities used by him. The concept of producer cannot therefore be interpreted as excluding the category of lessees of a holding (Ballmann   judgment, cited above, paragraph 12).
31.  Next, the status of producer is not subject to the condition that the holder of a reference quantity should produce it, in whole or in part, in the production units which he was operating when that quantity was allocated to him (Ballmann   judgment, cited above, paragraph 14).
45.  In that connection it should be pointed out that, in accordance with settled case-law, in the context of the cooperation between the Court of Justice and the national courts provided for by Article 234 EC, it is solely for the national court before which the dispute has been brought, and which must assume responsibility for the subsequent judicial decision, to determine in the light of the particular circumstances of the case both the need for a preliminary ruling in order to enable it to deliver judgment and the relevance of the questions which it submits to the Court. Consequently, where the questions submitted by the national court concern the interpretation of Community law, the Court of Justice is, in principle, bound to give a ruling (see,   inter alia  , Case C-415/93   Bosman   [1995] ECR I-4921, paragraph 59 and Case C-255/00   Grundig Italiana   [2002] ECR I-8003, paragraph 30).
46.  Admittedly, in exceptional circumstances, the Court must examine the circumstances in which the case was referred to it by the national court, in order to determine whether it has jurisdiction. The Court may refuse to rule on a question referred for a preliminary ruling by a national court only where it is quite obvious that the interpretation of Community law that is sought bears no relation to the actual facts of the main action or its purpose, where the problem is hypothetical, or where the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to the questions submitted to it (see,   inter alia  , Case C-379/98   PreussenElektra   [2001] ECR I-2099, paragraph 39 and   Grundig Italiana  , cited above, paragraph 31).
55.  Accordingly, the subsequent incorporation of a part of that territory within a pre-existingland   of the Federal Republic of Germany cannot prejudice the possibility afforded to a producer established in the former GDR to transfer his milk production to that area provided that the quantities of milk thus produced are included in the total guaranteed quantity for the former GDR (see, to that effect, in connection with a dairy holding situated in another Member State, judgment in Case C-463/93   St. Martinus Elten   [1997] ECR I-255, paragraphs 27 and 28).