Opinion of Mr Advocate General Mischo delivered on 2 June 1988

1 Translated from the French.

2 Official Journal 1979, L 33, p. 1.

3 See in particular the judgment of 29 September 1987 in Case 126/86 Giménez Zaera v Institut national de L sécurité sociale et la trésorene générale de la sécurité sociale [1987] ECR 3697, at paragraph 7.

4 See in particular the judgment of 12 June 1986 in Cases 98, 162 and 258/85 Bertini and Others v Regione Lazio and Unità sanitarie locali [1986] ECR 1885, at paragraph 8.

5 Sec judgment of 16 December 1981 in Case 244/80 Foglia v Novelto [1981] ECR 3045, at paragraph 18.

6 Case 120/78 REWE v Bundesmonopolverwaltung für Branntwein [1979] ECR 649.

7 See, in addition to the Cassis de Dijon judgment of 20 February 1979, cited above under footnote 5, in particular the Beer judgment of 12 March 1987 in Case 178/84 Commission v Germany [1987] ECR 1227, at paragraph 28, as well as the judgments of 26 June 1980 in Case 788/89 Gilti [1980] ECR 2071, at paragraph 6, 9 December 1981 in Case 193/80 Commission v Italy [1981] ECR 3019, at paragraph 21, and 10 November 1982 in Case 261/81 Rau [1982] ECR 3961, at paragraph 12.

8 See the very recent Milk substitutes judgment of 23 February 1988 in Case 216/84 Commission v France [1988] ECR 793, at paragraph 6.

9 Official Journal 1987, L 182 of 3 July 1987, p. 36.

10 See for example: — the Petillant de raisin judgment of 4 December 1986 in Case 179/85 Commission v Germany [1986] ECR 3879, at paragraph 11 ; — the Beer judgment of 12 March 1987 in Case 178/84 Commission v Germany (cited above) ECR 1227, at paragraph 35; — the Milk substitutes judgment of 23 February 1988 in Case 216/84 Commission v France (cited above) ECR 793, at paragraph 10.

11 See in particular the Beer judgment (cited above) ECR 1227, at paragraph 35 which refers to the abovementioned judgment of 9 December 1981 in Case 193/80, ECR 3019, at paragraph 27.

12 Sec in particular the judgment of 26 November 1985 in Case 182/84 Miro [1985] ECR 3731, at paragraph 24, and the Petillant de raisin judgment of 4 December 1986 (cited above) ECR 3879, at paragraph 11, which both refer to the judgment of 13 March 1984 in Case 16/83 Prantl [1984] ECR 1299. See also to this effect the Cassis de Dijon judgment at paragraph 13.

13 See the Court's judgment of 18 February 1987 in Case 98/86 Ministére public v Mathot [1987] ECR 809, at paragraph 11.

14 See to this effect the Mathot judgment (cited above) at paragraph 7.