Sociedad Cooperativa General Agropecuaria (ACOR) v Administración General del Estado.
Date: 2003-11-20
21. In view of the fact that sugar is a product covered by a common organisation of the market, it must be borne in mind, first and foremost, that where there is a regulation on the common organisation of the market in a given domain, the Member States are, according to settled case-law, under an obligation to refrain from taking any measures which might undermine or create exceptions to it (see Case C-462/01  Hammarsten  [2003] ECR I-781, paragraph 28, Case C-355/00  Freskot  [2003] ECR I-5263, paragraph 19, and Case C-137/00  Milk Marque and National Farmers ' Union  [2003] ECR I-7957, paragraph 63).
33. In Case C-1/94  Cavarzere Produzioni Industriali and Others  [1995] ECR I-2363, paragraph 34), the Court acknowledged that the pow er of manoeuvre conferred on Member States by Article 25 of Regulation No 1785/81 may be exercised at the same time as an adjustment of quotas pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation No 193/82 following a transfer of undertakings or factories, provided that the specific conditions governing the application of each of those provisions are complied with.
46. Indeed, it is clear from the 15th recital of the preamble to Regulation No 1785/81 that   " the production quotas allocated to undertakings constitute a means of guaranteeing producers Community prices and an outlet for their production" .  As the Court observed in its judgment in Case 250/84  Eridania and Others  [1986] ECR 117, paragraph 19, the quota system for the production of sugar is an essential part of the common organisation of the markets in that sector, which curbs production and aligns it as closely as possible with internal consumption whilst promoting regional specialisation.  Furthermore, the 15th recital and Article 25(1) of Regulation No 1785/81 and Article 4 of Regulation No 193/82 all emphasise how important it is, for a transfer of quotas, that the interests of each of the parties concerned, in particular those of sugar beet and sugar cane producers, be taken into consideration.
59. At the hearing, Ebro, relying on Case C-186/96  Demand  [1998] ECR I-8529, paragraph 35, further argued that, in the context of the common organisation of the markets in the milk and milk products sector, the Court had accepted that quotas could be reallocated for consideration.
60. In that regard, without it being necessary to consider whether, despite  a number of differences, the similarities which characterise the system of quotas in the milk and milk products sector, on the one hand, and that in the sugar sector, on the other, make it possible to transpose without further ado to the latter the findings made in the context of the former, it should be observed that paragraph 35 of the judgment in  Demand  is set in a specific context in which additional reference quantities had, after being withdrawn from the market in exchange for payment of compensation to those producers discontinuing milk production, been allocated to other producers because the withdrawal had resulted in a reduction greater than that initially envisaged.  The competent national authorities then offered the surplus to those producers who wished to increase their quota against payment of a sum equal to the amount paid by way of compensation to producers who had discontinued milk production (see  Demand , paragraph 21).