C-15/79

JUDGMENT OF 8. 11. 1979 — CASE 15/79

In Case 15/79,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven [administrative court of last instance in matters of trade and industry], The Hague, between

P. B. Groenveld B.V., Haarlem,

and

Produktschap voor Vee en Vlees [Cattle and Meat Board], Rijswijk,

Facts and Issues

I — Facts and procedure Produktschap", prohibits any manu- facturer of processed meat products from having in stock and processing the meat 1. Article 3 (1) of the Verordening Be- of solipeds. en Verwerking Vlees 1973 [Processing and Preparation of Meat Regulation 1973], adopted on 5 December 1973 by 2. The company P. B. Groenveld B.V., the Produktschap voor Vee en Vlees, the plaintiff in the main action, carries hereinafter referred to as "the on in the Netherlands the business of

GROENVELD v PRODUKTSCHAP VOOR VEE EN VLEES

wholesale import of and trade in fresh 1959] which preceded the present and frozen horsemeat and also makes regulation and Article 2 (1) of which smoked horsemeat. contained the same prohibition as that in Article 3 (1) of the present regulation. Part of that explanatory As it wished to extend its operations to note may be summarized as follows: the manufacture of horsemeat sausages, Groenveld, in accordance with Article 9 of the above-mentioned regulation, — Primarily in Anglo-Saxon asked the President of the Produktschap, countries objections exist to meat the defendant in the main action, to products containing processed exempt it from the prohibition contained horsemeat (at the hearing it was in Article 3 (1) of that regulation. further observed on behalf of the

"7. Also of relevance in this connexion is

the explanatory note to the Verordening Be- en Verwerking The order of the national court was

Vlees 1959 [Preparation and lodged at the Court Registry on 2 Processing of Meat Regulation February 1979.

JUDGMENT OF 8. 11. 1979 — CASE 15/79

4. In pursuance of Article 20 of the to those laid down by the American rules Protocol on the Statute of the Court of on this subject. The American regu- Justice of the EEC written observations lations prohibit any manufacturer of were lodged by the Produktschap, the processed meat products from keeping defendant in the main action, horsemeat on his premises. represented by its President, and by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by its Legal As regards the United Kingdom, there is Adviser, Rolf Wägenbaur, acting as no restriction on the importation of Agent, assisted by Auke Haagsma, an horsemeat into the country. official in the Legal Department. Nevertheless, the mere fact that British consumers might think that Netherlands exports of processed meat products On hearing the report of the Judge- might contain horsemeat would be Rapporteur and the views of the sufficient in the view of the Advocate General the Court decided to Produktschap to cause them substantial open the oral procedure without any and even perhaps irreversible damage. preparatory inquiry. By an order of 30 May 1979 it decided, in pursuance of Article 95 of the Rules of Procedure, to Finally the importation of prepared horsemeat is forbidden in the Federal assign this case to the Second Chamber. Republic of Germany in pursuance of Article 12 of the Fleischbeschaugesetz (Law on meat inspection). The certificate which must accompany imported II — Written observations sub- products must state that they do not mitted pursuant to Article contain any meat the importation of 20 of the Protocol on the which is forbidden in pursuance of Statute of the Court of Article 12 of the above-mentioned Law. Justice of the EEC

that this measure cannot be considered with veterinary or public health as being incompatible with Article 34 of inspections at production level) or to the Treaty. "endangering" exports of processed meat products to another Member State (the B — According to the Commission on labelling of products ought to be the contrary, the provision in question sufficient to convince purchasers in the goes beyond the limits within which importing Member States as well). There Member States are free to adopt rules on is therefore no "mandatory requirement" trade. The prohibition against manufac- (within the meaning of the judgment in turers of processed meat products Case 120/78, REWE-Zentral, [1979] processing horsemeat into such products ECR 649 ), capable of justifying the is an obstacle to the marketing of rules in dispute. products based on horsemeat. It thus In conclusion the Commission takes the constitutes a measure having an effect view that the answer to be given to the equivalent to a quantitative restriction College van Beroep voor het within the meaning of Articles 30 and 34. Bedrijfsleven should be that Articles 30 The Commission refers in particular to and 34 must be interpreted as meaning Council Directive No 77/99/EEC on that a provision of national law under health problems affecting intra- which a manufacturer of processed meat Community trade in meat products products is prohibited from having in (Official Journal L 26 of 31 July 1977, stock or processing horsemeat constitutes p. 85). That directive, which lays down a measure having an effect equivalent to the conditions for approval of a quantitative restriction. establishments for the processing of meat-based products does not provide for any prohibition similar to that which III — Oral procedure exists in the Netherlands.

2 That question was raised in the course of proceedings instituted by a wholesaler of horsemeat, who wishes to extend his operations to the manu- facture of sausages from horsemeat, against the refusal of the Produktschap, the defendant in the main action, to exempt him from the prohibition set out in Article 3 (1) of the above-mentioned regulation.

3 The order for reference, in particular Point 7, shows that the regulation in question was adopted for the purpose of protecting Netherlands exports of meat products both to Member States and to non-member countries which constitute important export markets and where there are objections to the consumption of horsemeat or indeed where the importation of products containing horsemeat is prohibited. As it is practically impossible to determine the presence of horsemeat in meat products the sole means of ensuring that such products do not contain horsemeat is to prohibit manufac- turers of meat products from having in stock, preparing or processing horsemeat. Thus exports of meat products to the United States must be accompanied by a certificate that the products in question meet requirements at least equivalent to those laid down by United States rules in that field, whereby a similar prohibition is imposed. Article 3 (1) of the above- mentioned regulation applies solely to the industrial manufacture of meat products but not to the stocking or retail sale of horsemeat by butchers. The file further establishes that the regulation in question does not affect imports or re-exports of horsemeat originating in other Member States or non- member countries.

7 That provision concerns national 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 at the expense of the production or of the trade of other Member States. This is not so in the case of a prohibition like that in question which is applied objectively to the production of goods of a certain kind without drawing a distinction depending on whether such goods are intended for the national market or for export.

8 The foregoing appreciation is not affected by the circumstance that the regu- lation in question has as its objective, inter alia, the safeguarding of the repu-

JUDGMENT OF 8. 11. 1979 — CASE 15/79

tation of the national production of meat products in certain export markets within the Community and in non-member countries where there are obstacles of a psychological or legislative nature to the consumption of horsemeat when the same prohibition is applied identically to the product in the domestic market of the State in question. The objective nature of that prohibition is not modified by the fact that the regulation in force in the Netherlands permits the retail sale of horsemeat by butchers. In fact that concession at the level of local trade does not have the effect of bringing about a prohibition at the level of industrial manufacture of the same product regardless of its destination.

In the present state of Community law a national measure prohibiting all manufacturers of meat products from having in stock or processing

GROENVELD PRODUKTSCHAP VOOR VEE EN VLEES

horsemeat is not incompatible with Article 34 of the Treaty if it does not discriminate between products intended for export and those marketed within the Member State in question.

Touffait Pescatore Mackenzie Stuart

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 8 November 1979.

A. Van Houtte A.Touffait