Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen eG contra Hauptzollamt Lindau.

JurisdictionEuropean Union
Celex Number61997CJ0356
ECLIECLI:EU:C:2000:364
Date06 July 2000
CourtCourt of Justice (European Union)
Procedure TypeReference for a preliminary ruling
Docket NumberC-356/97
EUR-Lex - 61997J0356 - EN 61997J0356

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 July 2000. - Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen eG v Hauptzollamt Lindau. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Finanzgericht München - Germany. - Additional levy on milk - Annual statement of quantities of milk delivered to purchaser - Late communication - Penalty - Validity of Article 3(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 536/93. - Case C-356/97.

European Court reports 2000 Page I-05461


Summary
Parties
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part

Keywords

1. Acts of the institutions - Regulations - Basic regulations and implementing regulations - Power conferred on the Commission in general terms - Lawfulness

(EC Treaty, Arts 145 and 155 (now Arts 202 EC and 211 EC); Council Regulation No 3950/92, Art. 11; Commission Regulation No 536/93, Art. 3(2), second subpara.)

2. Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Imposition of a mandatory financial penalty payable for exceeding the time-limit for communication, irrespective of the length of time by which that time-limit is exceeded

(Commission Regulation No 536/93, Art. 3(2), second subpara.)

Summary

1. Although, in applying Articles 145 and 155 of the Treaty (now Articles 202 EC and 211 EC), a distinction is drawn in case-law between essential rules, which are the Council's preserve, and those which, being merely of an implementing nature, may be delegated to the Commission, only provisions intended to give concrete shape to the fundamental guidelines of Community policy must be classified as essential rules. Since the essential rules of the additional milk levy scheme have been fixed by the Council in the basic regulation, it is sufficient for a general power to be delegated to the Commission to adopt the implementing measures. In those circumstances, Article 11 of Regulation No 3950/92, which authorises the Commission to adopt all the measures which are necessary for the implementation of that regulation, must be regarded as constituting a valid delegation to the Commission to lay down the penalty referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Regulation No 536/93.

( see paras 21-24, 32 )

2. The second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Regulation No 536/93 laying down detailed rules on the application of the additional levy on milk and milk products is invalid in that it imposes on the purchaser, in the event of failure to observe the time-limit referred to in the first subparagraph of that article, a financial penalty equal to the amount of the additional levy on milk due for a 0.1% overrun on the quantities of milk and milk equivalent delivered by producers, without making any provision for the length of time by which the time-limit is exceeded to be taken into account.

( see para. 45 and operative part )

Parties

In Case C-356/97,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Finanzgericht München (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen eG

and

Hauptzollamt Lindau

on the validity of the second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 536/93 of 9 March 1993 laying down detailed rules on the application of the additional levy on milk and milk products (OJ 1993 L 57, p. 12),

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),

composed of: R. Schintgen, President of the Second Chamber, acting as President of the Sixth Chamber, P.J.G. Kapteyn and G. Hirsch (Rapporteur), Judges,

Advocate General: A. Saggio,

Registrar: H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

- Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen eG, by K. Seitz, Steuerberater at the Genossenschaftsverband Bayern, and W. Frankenberger, Wirtschaftsprüfer at the Genossenschaftsverband Bayern,

- the German Government, by E. Röder, Ministerialrat at the Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs, acting as Agent,

- the Commission of the European Communities, by K.-D. Borchardt, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent,

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen eG, represented by B. Buth, jurist at the Deutscher Raiffeisenverband eV, the Hauptzollamt Lindau, represented by T. Cirener, Oberregierungsrat, the German Government, represented by W.-D. Plessing, Ministerialrat at the Federal Finance Ministry, acting as Agent, and the Commission, represented by K.-D. Borchardt, at the hearing on 24 March 1999,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 16 June 1999,

gives the following

Judgment

Grounds

1 By order of 17 September 1997, received at the Court on 16 October 1997, the Finanzgericht München (Finance Court, Munich) referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) a question on the validity of the second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 536/93 of 9 March 1993 laying down detailed rules on the application of the additional levy on milk and milk products (OJ 1993 L 57, p. 12).

2 That question was raised in proceedings between Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen eG (hereinafter the Wiedergeltingen dairy) and the Hauptzollamt Lindau (Principal Customs Office, Lindau, hereinafter the HZA) concerning the late communication by that dairy, in its capacity as a purchaser of milk, of the summary of the statements drawn up for each affiliated producer indicating the quantities of milk which it had delivered.

Legal background

3 Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 of 28 December 1992 establishing an additional levy in the milk and milk products sector (OJ 1992 L 405, p. 1, hereinafter the basic regulation)extended for seven new consecutive 12-month periods from 1 April 1993 the additional levy on milk introduced by Council Regulation (EEC) No 856/84 of 31 March 1984 amending Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (OJ 1984 L 90, p. 10).

4 Article 2(1) and (2), first subparagraph, of the basic regulation provides:

1. The levy shall be payable on all quantities of milk or milk equivalent marketed during the 12-month period in question in excess of the relevant quantity referred to in Article 3. It shall be shared between the producers who contributed to the overrun.

In accordance with a decision of the Member State, the contribution of producers towards the levy payable shall be established, after the unused reference quantities have been reallocated or not, either at the level of the purchaser, in the light of the overrun remaining after unused reference quantities have been allocated in proportion to the reference quantities of each producer, or at national level, in the light of the overrun in the reference quantity of each individual producer.

2. As regards deliveries, before a date and in accordance with detailed rules to be laid down, the purchaser liable for...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
18 cases
  • Azienda Agricola Disarò Antonio and Others v Cooperativa Milka 2000 Soc. coop. arl.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 3 March 2009
    ...21 de enero de 1992, Pressler (C‑319/90, Rec. p. I‑203), apartados 12 a 17, y de 6 de julio de 2000, Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen (C‑356/97, Rec. p. I‑5461), apartados 35 y 36. 39 – Véanse, por ejemplo, las sentencias Schräder HS Kraftfutter, citada en la nota 37, apartado 22; de ......
  • Molkerei Wagenfeld Karl Niemann GmbH & Co. KG v Bezirksregierung Hannover.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 27 June 2002
    ...and France v Commission [1989] ECR 3639, paragraph 15; Case C-240/90 Germany v Commission [1992] ECR I-5383, paragraphs 36 and 37; and Case C-356/97 Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen [2000] ECR I-5461, paragraph 13 – See paragraphs 9 to 11 of the Commission's written observations (Fren......
  • Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the European Communities.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 21 February 2002
    ...others, Case 266/84 Denkavit France [1986] ECR 149, paragraph 17; Case C-69/94 France v Commission [1997] ECR I-2599, paragraph 38; and Case C-356/97 Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen [2000] ECR I-5461, paragraphs 35 and 36. 46 – See paragraph 87 of this Opinion. 47 – See, for example,......
  • Campina GmbH & Co. v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt (Oder).
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 8 March 2007
    ...to them by producers. Such penalty may not exceed ECU 20 000.’ 5 That provision was declared to be disproportionate by the judgment in Case C‑356/97 Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen [2000] ECR I‑5461). 6 In the meantime, the Commission adopted Regulation No 1001/98, Article 1 of which......
  • Get Started for Free