Ravil SARL v Bellon import SARL and Biraghi SpA.
Date: 2003-05-20
27.  In the procedure established by Article 234 EC providing for cooperation between national courts and the Court of Justice, it is for the latter to provide the national court with an answer which will be of use to it and enable it to determine the case before it. To that end, the Court may have to reformulate the question referred to it (see,   inter alia  , Case C-88/99   Roquette Frères   [2000] ECR I-10465, paragraph 18). It may also find it necessary to consider provisions of Community law to which the national court has not referred in its question (see,   inter alia  , Case C-230/98   Schiavon   [2000] ECR I-3547, paragraph 37).
37.  It should be observed, first, that the provisions of a convention between two Member States cannot apply in the relations between those States if they are found to be contrary to the rules of the Treaty, in particular the rules on the free movement of goods (see, to that effect, Case C-3/91   Exportur   [1992] ECR I-5529, paragraph 8).
40.  It must be remembered that Article 29 EC prohibits all measures which have as their specific object or effect the restriction of patterns of exports and thereby the establishment of a difference in treatment between the domestic trade of a Member State and its export trade, in such a way as to provide a particular advantage for national production or for the domestic market of the State in question (see,   inter alia  , with respect to national measures, Case C-209/98   Sydhavnens Sten  & Grus   [2000] ECR I-3743, paragraph 34).
43.  The bilateral convention making that legislation applicable in another Member State thus has the specific effect of restricting patterns of exports of cheese eligible for the designation of origin and thereby of establishing a difference in treatment between the domestic trade of a Member State and its export trade. It therefore introduces quantitative restrictions on exports within the meaning of Article 29 EC (see, to that effect, with respect to a national measure,   Belgium   v   Spain  , paragraphs 38 and 40 to 42).
48.  Community legislation displays a general tendency to enhance the quality of products within the framework of the common agricultural policy, in order to promote the reputation of those products through   inter alia   the use of designations of origin which enjoy special protection (see   Belgium   v   Spain  , paragraph 53). That tendency took the form in the quality wines sector of the adoption of Council Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 of 16 March 1987 laying down special provisions relating to quality wines produced in specified regions (OJ 1987 L 84, p. 59), repealed and replaced by Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine (OJ 1999 L 179, p. 1). It was also manifested, in relation to other agricultural products, in the adoption of Regulation No 2081/92, which, according to its preamble, is intended   inter alia   to meet consumers' expectations as regards products of quality and an identifiable geographical origin and to enable producers, in conditions of fair competition, to secure higher incomes in return for a genuine effort to improve quality.
49.  Designations of origin fall within the scope of industrial and commercial property rights. The applicable rules protect those entitled to use them against improper use of those designations by third parties seeking to profit from the reputation which they have acquired. They are intended to guarantee that the product bearing them comes from a specified geographical area and displays certain particular characteristics. They may enjoy a high reputation amongst consumers and constitute for producers who fulfil the conditions for using them an essential means of attracting custom. The reputation of designations of origin depends on their image in the minds of consumers. That image in turn depends essentially on particular characteristics and more generally on the quality of the product. It is on the latter, ultimately, that the product's reputation is based (see   Belgium   v   Spain  , paragraphs 54 to 56). For consumers, the link between the reputation of the producers and the quality of the products also depends on his being assured that products sold under the designation are authentic.
51.  Against that background, such a bilateral convention may apply in relations between the two contracting Member States despite its restrictive effects on trade if it is shown that it is necessary and proportionate and capable of upholding the reputation of the designation of origin concerned (see, to that effect,   Belgium   v   Spain  , paragraphs 58 and 59).
60.  In this context, it must be accepted that checks performed outside the region of production would provide fewer guarantees of the quality and authenticity of the product than checks carried out in the region of production under the responsibility of those entitled to use the designation (see, to that effect,   Belgium   v   Spain  , paragraph 67). First, checks performed in the region of production under the responsibility of those entitled to use the designation of origin are thorough and systematic in nature and are done by experts who have specialised knowledge of the characteristics of the product. Second, it is hardly conceivable that representatives of the persons entitled to use the designation could effectively introduce such checks in other Member States.
61.  The risk to the quality and authenticity of the product finally offered to consumers is consequently greater where it has been grated and packaged outside the region of production than when that has been done within the region (see, to that effect,   Belgium   v   Spain  , paragraph 74).
63.  Consequently, a bilateral convention that renders applicable a condition of grating and packaging in the region of production, whose aim is to preserve the reputation of the product by strengthening control over its particular characteristics and its quality, may be regarded as justified as a measure protecting the designation of origin which may be used by all the operators concerned and is of decisive importance to them (see, to that effect,   Belgium   v   Spain  , paragraph 75).
65.  The designation of origin would not receive comparable protection from an obligation imposed on operators established outside the region of production to inform consumers, by means of appropriate labelling, that the grating and packaging has taken place outside that region. Any deterioration in the quality or authenticity of cheese grated and packaged outside the region of production, resulting from the materialisation of the risks associated with grating and packaging, might harm the reputation of all cheese marketed under the designation of origin, including that grated and packaged in the region of production under the control of the group of producers entitled to use the designation (see, to that effect,   Belgium   v   Spain  , paragraphs 76 and 77).
86.  It is settled case-law that the prohibition of quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect applies not only to national measures but also to measures adopted by the Community institutions (see,   inter alia  , Case C-114/96   Kieffer and Thill   [1997] ECR I-3629, paragraph 27, and Case C-169/99   Schwarzkopf   [2001] ECR I-5901, paragraph 37).
88.  Accordingly, for the reasons stated in paragraphs 40 to 43 above, which are applicable   mutatis mutandis   to the situation under examination, where the use of the PDO   "Grana Padano"   for cheese marketed in grated form is made subject to the condition that grating and packaging operations be carried out in the region of production, this constitutes a measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on exports within the meaning of Article 29 EC.
Whether the condition that the product be grated and immediately packaged in the region of production is justified
93.  Nevertheless, the requirement of legal certainty means that Community rules must enable those concerned to know precisely the extent of the obligations which they impose on them (see Case C-209/96   United Kingdom   v   Commission   [1998] ECR I-5655, paragraph 35).