Odbor kompatibility s právem ES Úřad vlády ČR	I S A P Informační Systém pro Aproximaci Práva
	Databáze č. 17 : Databáze judikatury

ă Odbor kompatibility s právem ES, Úřad vlády ČR - určeno pouze pro potřebu ministerstev a ostatních ústředních orgánů


	Číslo (Kód CELEX): Number (CELEX Code):		61982J0222

	Název: Title:		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 13 DECEMBER 1983. APPLE AND PEAR DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL V K. J. LEWIS LTD AND OTHERS. REFERENCE FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING FROM THE COUNTY COURT, TUNBRIDGE WELLS. NATIONAL MEASURES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRODUCTION AND SALE OF DOMESTIC APPLES AND PEARS. CASE 222/82.

	Publikace: Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1983 PAGES 4083 - 4142

	Předmět (klíčová slova): Keywords		AGRICULTURE;FRUIT AND VEGETABLES;FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS;QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS;MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT;ACCESSION;

	Související předpisy: Corresponding acts:		157E030;157E034;157E177;372R1035;172B060

	Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty: Corresponding Judgements:


	Plný text: Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:

Názor soudu a komentář:

Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
1. THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY RELATING TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND TO AGRICULTURE AND THE RULES ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES DO NOT PREVENT A MEMBER STATE FROM ADOPTING OR MAINTAINING MEASURES (I) ESTABLISHING A DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL FOR FRUIT PRODUCTION, COMPOSED OF MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE MINISTER RESPONSIBLE, IN PARTICULAR FROM AMONG THE GROWERS INVOLVED, AND (II) REQUIRING ONLY FRUIT GROWERS WITH A PLANTATION WHICH EXCEEDS A SPECIFIED SIZE TO REGISTER WITH THE SAID COUNCIL, TO FURNISH RETURNS AND INFORMATION ON THEIR ACTIVITIES IN THE INDUSTRY AND TO FINANCE THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND OTHER EXPENSES OF THE COUNCIL BY THE PAYMENT OF AN ANNUAL CHARGE, IN SO FAR AS THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COUNCIL CONSIST IN COMPILING STATISTICS, PROMOTING OR UNDERTAKING RESEARCH, MAKING THE RESULTS THUS OBTAINED AVAILABLE TO GROWERS AND GIVING GROWERS TECHNICAL ADVICE ABOUT FRUIT-GROWING.

2. THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY RELATING TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND TO AGRICULTURE AND THE RULES ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES DO NOT PREVENT A NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION IN THE FRUIT-GROWING SECTOR FROM DRAWING ATTENTION, IN ITS PUBLICITY, TO THE SPECIFIC QUALITIES OF THE FRUIT PRODUCED WITHIN THE MEMBER STATE IN QUESTION OR FROM ORGANIZING CAMPAIGNS TO PROMOTE THE SALE OF CERTAIN VARIETIES, MENTIONING THEIR PARTICULAR PROPERTIES, EVEN IF THOSE VARIETIES ARE TYPICAL OF NATIONAL PRODUCTION; ON THE OTHER HAND, IT WOULD BE CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 30 OF THE TREATY FOR SUCH A BODY TO ENGAGE IN PUBLICITY INTENDED TO DISCOURAGE THE PURCHASE OF PRODUCTS FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES OR TO DISPARAGE THOSE PRODUCTS IN THE EYES OF CONSUMERS OR TO ADVISE CONSUMERS TO PURCHASE DOMESTIC PRODUCTS SOLELY BY REASON OF THEIR NATIONAL ORIGIN.

3. THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY RELATING TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND TO AGRICULTURE AND THE RULES ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES DO NOT PREVENT A NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION IN THE FRUIT-GROWING SECTOR FROM ADDRESSING TO GROWERS, WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF ITS GENERAL ADVISORY ROLE, RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING THE QUALITY AND PRESENTATION OF THE FRUIT MARKETED; ON THE OTHER HAND, IN VIEW OF THE EXHAUSTIVE NATURE OF THE SYSTEM OF COMMON QUALITY STANDARDS, IT WOULD BE UNLAWFUL FOR SUCH A BODY TO ATTEMPT TO IMPOSE COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS DIFFERENT FROM THOSE COMMON STANDARDS, BY APPLYING ANY SORT OF SANCTIONS OR BY USING THE AUTHORITY VESTED IN IT BY ITS CONSTITUTION TO BRING PRESSURE TO BEAR ON GROWERS OR TRADERS.

4. THE REQUIREMENT FOR GROWERS WHOSE POTENTIAL CAPACITY EXCEEDS CERTAIN LIMITS TO BECOME MEMBERS OF A GROWER' S ORGANIZATION OTHER THAN THE ORGANIZATIONS REFERRED TO IN THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE II OF REGULATION NO 1035/72 CANNOT BE REGARDED AS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY RELATING TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS, TO AGRICULTURE AND THE RULES ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS IN THE FRUIT AND VEGETABLE SECTOR UNLESS THE ACTIVITIES OF THAT ORGANIZATION ARE THEMSELVES CONTRARY TO THOSE PROVISIONS.

5. A NATIONAL CHARGE IMPOSED ON AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMUNITY PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY IN SO FAR AS IT HAS THE EFFECT, AS A RESULT OF ITS INFLUENCE ON PRICE FORMATION OR THROUGH THE CHANGE IN THE STRUCTURE OF AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS WHICH MAY RESULT THEREFROM, OF IMPEDING THE FUNCTIONING OF THE MACHINERY PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS. ALTHOUGH IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO CONSIDER WHETHER, AND IF SO, TO WHAT EXTENT, THE CHARGE WHICH IT IS CALLED UPON TO CONSIDER HAS ACTUALLY PRODUCED SUCH EFFECTS, A CHARGE OF WHICH THE PROCEEDS ARE ESSENTIALLY USED FOR PUBLICITY MEASURES WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE TO BE FINANCED BY THE PRODUCERS THEMSELVES CANNOT HAVE SUCH EFFECTS.

6. THE LEVYING OF A NATIONAL CHARGE ON AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS IN ORDER TO FINANCE THE ACTIVITIES OF A NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION IN THE FRUIT-GROWING SECTOR WOULD BE CONTRARY TO COMMUNITY LAW IN SO FAR AS IT SERVED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIES INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY RELATING TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS, TO AGRICULTURE AND THE RULES ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS IN THE FRUIT AND VEGETABLE SECTOR.

7. THE FACT THAT A NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION IN THE FRUIT-GROWING SECTOR WAS CREATED AND MAINTAINED WITH THE EXPRESS APPROVAL OF GROWERS REPRESENTING MORE THAN HALF OF THE LAND PLANTED AND AFTER CONSULTATION WITH ORGANIZATIONS APPARENTLY REPRESENTING A LARGE NUMBER OF PERSONS CARRYING ON BUSINESS OR EMPLOYED IN THE INDUSTRY DOES NOT AFFECT THE REPLY TO BE GIVEN TO THE QUESTION REGARDING THE COMPATIBILITY OF THAT ORGANIZATION WITH COMMUNITY LAW.

8. ARTICLES 30 AND 34 OF THE TREATY AND THE REGULATIONS ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS CONFER UPON INDIVIDUALS RIGHTS WHICH THEY MAY ENFORCE BEFORE THE COURTS OF A MEMBER STATE.

9. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES OF COMMUNITY LAW GIVEN BY THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY MUST BE APPLIED BY THE NATIONAL COURT EVEN TO LEGAL RELATIONSHIPS ARISING AND ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE JUDGMENT RULING ON THE REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION, PROVIDED THAT IN OTHER RESPECTS THE CONDITIONS ENABLING THE ACTION RELATING TO THE APPLICATION OF THE SAID RULES TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURTS HAVING JURISDICTION ARE SATISFIED.

10. WHERE A CHARGE WHICH SERVES TO FINANCE A BODY SOME OF WHOSE ACTIVITIES ARE HELD TO BE CONTRARY TO COMMUNITY LAW, IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO DECIDE WHETHER, IN THE LIGHT OF THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ACTIVITIES IN QUESTION, THAT FACT RENDERS THE CHARGE UNLAWFUL AND MUST ENTAIL TOTAL OR PARTIAL EXEMPTION. IT IS ALSO FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO DETERMINE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS NATIONAL LAW, WHETHER AND TO WHAT EXTENT THE CHARGE MUST BE REFUNDED AND WHETHER AND TO WHAT EXTENT SUCH ENTITLEMENT TO A REFUND IS OFFSET BY THE ADVANTAGES ACCRUING DIRECTLY TO THE PERSON CONCERNED AS A RESULT OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SAID BODY.

11. AS REGARDS PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE AGRICULTURAL MARKETS AT THE TIME OF THE UNITED KINGDOM' S ACCESSION, THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY PROHIBITING MEASURES HAVING AN EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS BECAME APPLICABLE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM ON 1 FEBRUARY 1973 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 60 (1) OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):