C-803/79

WyrokTSUE1980-06-19CELEX: 61979CJ0803ECLI:EU:C:1980:166

Analiza orzeczenia

Sekcja wygenerowana przez AI na podstawie treści orzeczenia — nie stanowi cytatu.

Zagadnienie prawne
Czy sformułowanie podpozycji EX 02.01 A II (A) 2 (dd) EX 22 w załącznikach do rozporządzeń Komisji ustalających refundacje wywozowe dla wołowiny i cielęciny może być uznane za obejmujące wywóz kawałków przedniej ćwiartki mrożonej, odkostnionej lub bez kości wołowiny lub cielęciny, w tym niektórych kawałków określonych jako wewnętrzne części policzków, cienkie boki i golenie, gdy te ostatnie nie były pakowane oddzielnie, i czy w związku z tym kwalifikują się one do refundacji wywozowych?
Ratio decidendi
Trybunał uznał, że w przypadku niejednoznaczności tekstu przepisu należy go interpretować w świetle intencji i celu rozporządzeń, których jest częścią. Wymóg oddzielnego pakowania, choć gramatycznie niejasny, ma na celu ułatwienie kontroli i musi dotyczyć wszystkich kawałków kwalifikujących się do refundacji. Komisja wykazała, że refundacje są przeznaczone dla kawałków mięsa wysokiej jakości, do których nie zaliczają się policzki, podroby, cienkie boki i golenie, mające wiele zastosowań w samej Wspólnocie. Interpretacja, która pozwalałaby na uzyskanie refundacji dla tych kawałków, gdy ich obecność jest ukryta (tj. nie są pakowane oddzielnie), byłaby sprzeczna z interesami Wspólnoty i celem kontroli.
Stan faktyczny
W postępowaniu karnym toczącym się we Francji przeciwko Gérardowi Roudolffowi, prezesowi i dyrektorowi zarządzającemu francuskiej firmy, zarzucono składanie fałszywych deklaracji w celu uzyskania refundacji wywozowych za mrożoną, odkostnioną lub bez kości wołowinę i cielęcinę eksportowaną do Grecji w okresie od sierpnia 1974 r. do kwietnia 1975 r. Organy celne stwierdziły, że eksportowane mięso zawierało wewnętrzne części policzków, golenie i cienkie boki, które ich zdaniem nie kwalifikowały się do refundacji. Oskarżony kwestionował tę interpretację, twierdząc, że produkty te nie kwalifikowałyby się do refundacji tylko wtedy, gdyby były pakowane oddzielnie.
Rozstrzygnięcie
Sformułowanie podpozycji EX 02.01 A II (A) 2 (dd) EX 22 w załącznikach do rozporządzeń Komisji nr 2010, 2243, 2538, 2645, 2943, 3084 i 3205/74 oraz nr 180, 494 i 735/75 ustalających refundacje wywozowe dla wołowiny i cielęciny nie może być uznane za obejmujące wywóz kawałków przedniej ćwiartki mrożonej, odkostnionej lub bez kości wołowiny lub cielęciny, określonych jako wewnętrzne części policzków, cienkie boki i golenie, ani za umożliwiające im kwalifikowanie się do refundacji wywozowych.

Pełny tekst orzeczenia

Avis juridique important | 61979J0803 Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 June 1980. - Criminal proceedings against Gérard Roudolff. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Tribunal de grande instance de Paris - France. - Export refunds - frozen beef and veal. - Case 803/79. European Court reports 1980 Page 02015 Greek special edition Page 00345 Summary Parties Subject of the case Grounds Decision on costs Operative part Keywords . COMMUNITY LAW - INTERPRETATION - AMBIGUOUS TEXT - TELEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION 2 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - BEEF AND VEAL - CUTS OF FOREQUARTERS OF FROZEN , BONED OR BONELESS MEAT SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS , THIN FLANKS AND SHIN - EXCLUSION FROM SUBHEADING EX 02 . 01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 , AS INCORPORATED INTO THE AGRICULTURAL REGULATIONS - POSSIBILITY OF QUALIFYING FOR EXPORT REFUNDS - NONE ( REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010 , 2243 , 2538 , 2645 , 2943 , 3084 AND 3205/74 AND NOS 180 , 494 AND 735/75 ) Summary . WHERE THE TEXT OF A PROVISION IS AMBIGUOUS IT SHOULD BE INTERPRETED IN THE LIGHT OF THE INTENTION AND PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF WHICH IT FORMS PART . . THE WORDING OF SUBHEADING EX 02 . 01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 APPEARING IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010 , 2243 , 2538 , 2645 , 2943 , 3084 AND 3205/74 AND NOS 180 , 494 AND 735/75 FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL CANNOT BE REGARDED AS COVERING EXPORTS OF CUTS OF FOREQUARTERS OF FROZEN , BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL , SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS , THIN FLANKS AND SHIN , OR AS ENABLING THEM TO QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS . Parties IN CASE 803/79 REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE EXAMINING MAGISTRATE AT THE TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE ( COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ), PARIS , FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT AGAINST GERARD ROUDOLFF Subject of the case ON THE INTERPRETATION OF REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010 , 2243 , 2538 , 2645 , 2943 , 3084 AND 3205/74 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 209 , P . 34 ; L 238 , P . 31 ; L 271 , P . 52 ; L 283 , P . 18 ; L 311 , P . 38 ; L 327 , P . 7 ; AND L 341 , P . 38 ) AND NOS 180 , 494 AND 735/75 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 20 , P . 11 ; L 53 , P . 39 ; AND L 73 , P . 29 ) FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL , IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER CUTS OF FROZEN , BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS , THIN FLANKS AND SHINS , WHEN NOT PACKED SEPARATELY , QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS , Grounds BY AN ORDER OF 7 NOVEMBER 1979 WHICH WAS RECEIVED AT THE COURT ON THE 12TH OF THAT MONTH , THE EXAMINING MAGISTRATE AT THE TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE , PARIS , REFERRED TO THE COURT FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY A QUESTION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF SUBHEADING EX 02.01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 , APPEARING IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL FOR THE PERIOD FROM AUGUST 1974 TO APRIL 1975 . 2 THE QUESTION AROSE IN THE COURSE OF A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION CONCERNING THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR OF A FRENCH COMPANY , CHARGED WITH HAVING MADE FALSE DECLARATIONS DURING THE ABOVE-MENTIONED PERIOD IN ORDER TO OBTAIN EXPORT REFUNDS FOR FROZEN , BONED OR BONELESS BEEF AND VEAL EXPORTED TO GREECE . THE CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES ASCERTAINED THAT THE EXPORTED MEAT INCLUDED THE INSIDES OF CHEEKS , SHIN AND THIN FLANKS , WHICH IN ITS OPINION DID NOT QUALIFY FOR REFUNDS UNDER THE ABOVE-MENTIONED REGULATIONS . THE ACCUSED IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS CHALLENGES THAT INTERPRETATION . HE MAINTAINS THAT THE PRODUCTS IN QUESTION WOULD ONLY HAVE FAILED TO QUALIFY FOR THE REFUNDS IF THEY HAD BEEN PACKAGED SEPARATELY . THE QUESTION ASKED BY THE COURT MAKING THE REFERENCE IS WHETHER THE WORDING OF SUBHEADING EX 02.01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010 , 2243 , 2538 , 2645 , 2943 , 3084 AND 3205/74 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 209 , P . 34 ; L 238 , P . 31 ; L 271 , P . 52 ; L 283 , P . 18 ; L 311 , P . 38 ; L 327 , P . 7 ; AND L 341 , P . 38 ) AND NOS 180 , 494 AND 735/75 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 20 , P . 11 ; L 53 , P . 39 ; AND L 73 , P . 29 ) FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL MAY BE REGARDED AS COVERING EXPORTS IN CARDBOARD BOXES OF CUTS OF FOREQUARTERS OF FROZEN , BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL , INCLUDING CERTAIN CUTS SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS , THIN FLANKS AND SHIN , WHEN THE LATTER WERE NOT PACKAGED SEPARATELY , AND WHETHER THEY THEREFORE QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS . DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION IN THE PRESENT CASE THERE WERE TWO VERSIONS OF THE DISPUTED SUBHEADING , THE FIRST , WHICH APPEARED IN REGULATIONS NOS 2010 AND 2243/74 , BEING WORDED IN THE SIX LANGUAGES OF THE COMMUNITIES AS FOLLOWS : ' ' . . . MORCEAUX DESOSSES , A L ' EXCEPTION DES JOUES , DES ABATS , DU FLANCHET ET DU JARRET , EMBALLES SEPAREMENT : ' ' ' ' . . . PEZZI DISOSSATI , ESCLUSI LE GUANCE , LE FRATTAGLIE , LA PANCIA , LA TIBIA E IL MUSCOLO ADERENTE , CONFEZIONATI SEPARATAMENTE . ' ' ' ' . . . DELEN , ZONDER BEEN , MET UITZONDERING VAN KOPVLESS , SLACHTAFVALLEN , DE WANG ON DE SCHENKEL , AFZONDERLIJK VERPAKT . ' ' ' ' . . . TEILSTUCKE OHNE KNOCHEN , MIT AUSNAHME VON KOPFFLEISCH , SCHLACHTABFALLEN FLEISCH- UND KNOCHENDUNNUNG UND DIE HESSE , GETRENNT VERPACKT . ' ' ' ' . . . BONED OR BONELESS , EXCLUDING THE CHAPS , THE OFFALS , THE THIN FLANKS AND THE SHIN , PACKAGED SEPARATELY . ' ' ' ' . . . UDBENET MED UNDTAGELSE AF KAEBER , SLAGTEAFFALD , SLAG OG SKANK , STYKKERNE EMBALLERET HVER FOR SIG ' ' . IN A SECOND VERSION , REGULATIONS NOS 2538 , 2645 , 2943 , 3084 AND 3205/74 AND NOS 180 , 494 AND 734/75 INCORPORATED THE SAME MODIFICATION IN ALL THE LANGUAGE VERSIONS . IT READS ( IN FRENCH ) AS FOLLOWS : ' ' . . . MORCEAUX DESOSSES : - A L ' EXCEPTION DES JOUES ET DES ABATS POUR LES EXPORTATIONS A DESTINATION DES ETATS-UNIS - A L ' EXCEPTION DES JOUES , DES ABATS , DU FLANCHET ET DU JARRET , EMBALLES SEPAREMENT , . . . ' ' 7 FROM A LINGUISTIC POINT OF VIEW THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE WORDS ' ' EMBALLES SEPAREMENT ' ' ( PACKAGED SEPARATELY ) REFER TO ' ' MORCEAUX DESOSSES ' ' ( BONED OR BONELESS CUTS ) OR WHETHER THEY REFER ON THE CONTRARY TO THE EXCEPTION MADE FOR ' ' LES JOUES , LES ABATS , LE FLANCHET ET LE JARRET ' ' ( THE CHAPS , THE OFFALS , THE THIN FLANKS AND THE SHIN ). ALTHOUGH IN THE DIFFERENT VERSIONS THERE ARE GRAMMATICAL INDICATIONS , PARTICULARLY THE PUNCTUATION , WHICH SEEM TO SUPPORT THE FORMER INTERPRETATION , THE TEXT WHEN READ AS A WHOLE REMAINS AMBIGUOUS . THE FUNCTION OF THE WORDS IN QUESTION MUST THEREFORE BE EXAMINED IN THE LIGHT OF THE INTENTION AND PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS IN QUESTION . IN THAT CONTEXT THE COMMISSION CLAIMS IN ITS OBSERVATIONS THAT THE COMMUNITY REGULATIONS RESTRICT THE GRANTING OF REFUNDS TO QUALITY CUTS OF MEAT . THESE DO NOT INCLUDE CHEEKS , OFFALS , THIN FLANKS AND SHIN , WHICH ARE USED FOR PROCESSING AND FOR WHICH AS SUCH THERE ARE IN ANY CASE MANY USES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ITSELF . ON THAT GROUND THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR GRANTING EXPORT REFUNDS . MOREOVER , AS THE BONED OR BONELESS CUTS ARE SMALL AND PRACTICALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM EACH OTHER AFTER FREEZING , IT IS NECESSARY FOR EACH PIECE TO BE PACKAGED SEPARATELY IN ORDER TO ENABLE THEM TO BE INSPECTED . THE COURT IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE COMMISSION HAS DEMONSTRATED SUFFICIENTLY THE REASON FOR THE REQUIREMENT CONCERNING SEPARATE PACKAGING : IT IS INTENDED TO FACILITATE INSPECTION AND MUST THEREFORE APPLY TO ALL CUTS WHICH QUALIFY FOR REFUNDS . THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS VIEW IS ALL THE MORE APPARENT IN SO FAR AS THE INTERPRETATION , WHEREBY THE WORDS ' ' EMBALLES SEPAREMENT ' ' REFER TO THE EXCEPTION , DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUCH AS TO GIVE THOSE WORDS ANY REAL PURPOSE . IT WOULD MEAN THAT CHEEKS , OFFALS , THIN FLANKS AND SHIN WOULD QUALIFY FOR REFUNDS WHEN THE PRESENCE OF SUCH CUTS IS CONCEALED , BUT THAT THEY WOULD FAIL SO TO QUALIFY WHEN THEIR PRESENCE IS EASY TO ESTABLISH , SOMETHING WHICH IS HARDLY IN THE INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY . THE REPLY TO THE QUESTION WHICH HAS BEEN ASKED SHOULD THEREFORE BE THAT THE WORDING OF SUBHEADING EX 02.01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010 , 2243 , 2538 , 2645 , 2943 , 3084 / AND 3205/74 AND NOS 180 , 494 AND 735/75 , FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL COULD NOT BE REGARDED AS COVERING EXPORTS OF CUTS OF FOREQUARTERS OF FROZEN , BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL , SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS , THIN FLANKS AND SHIN , OR AS ENABLING THEM TO QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS . Decision on costs THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES , WHICH HAS SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT , ARE NOT RECOVERABLE ; AS THE PROCEEDINGS ARE , IN SO FAR AS THE ACCUSED IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS IS CONCERNED , A STEP IN THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE NATIONAL COURT , THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT . Operative part ON THOSE GROUNDS , THE COURT ( SECOND CHAMBER ) IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO IT BY THE EXAMINING MAGISTRATE AT THE TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE , PARIS , BY AN ORDER OF 7 NOVEMBER 1979 , HEREBY RULES : THE WORDING OF SUBHEADING EX 02.01 A II ( A ) 2 ( DD ) EX 22 IN THE ANNEXES TO REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSION NOS 2010 , 2243 , 2538 , 2645 , 2943 , 3084 AND 3205/74 AND NOS 180 , 494 AND 735/75 FIXING THE EXPORT REFUNDS ON BEEF AND VEAL COULD NOT BE REGARDED AS COVERING EXPORTS OF CUTS OF FOREQUARTERS OF FROZEN , BONED OR BONELESS BEEF OR VEAL , SPECIFIED AS INSIDES OF CHEEKS , THIN FLANKS AND SHIN , OR AS ENABLING THEM TO QUALIFY FOR EXPORT REFUNDS .

© Unia Europejska, źródło: EUR-Lex (eur-lex.europa.eu), pozyskano 13.07.2026. Autentyczne są wyłącznie wersje opublikowane w Dz. Urz. UE. · Źródło