Opinion of Mr Advocate General Tesauro

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

1. In these proceedings, the Court is once again called on to interpret Regulation (EEC) No 2772/75 of the Council of 29 October 1975 on marketing standards for eggs (the Regulation).

2. Pursuant to the Regulation, in particular Article 21 thereof, packs should bear no other indications than those provided for in it.

3. In the present case the Plaintiff, although not denying that it is prohibited to indicate the date of laying on small packs, nevertheless contends that such a prohibition does not extend to wording such as packed on the day of laying, since it does not indicate an additional date not provided for by the Regulation but rather an indication as to the efficiency and rapidity of the marketing system used by the producer.

4. Let me say straight away that that argument appears sophistic and unconvincing. A statement affixed to a pack which bears the date of packing, indicating that the eggs were packed on the day of laying, is clearly intended to draw the consumer's attention not to the efficiency and rapidity of the marketing system but rather to the actual date of laying of the eggs, that being confirmed moreover by the fact that the slip accompanying the pack bears the words Congratulations on buying these top quality Gold eggs showing the date of laying.

5. However, as I observed in my Opinion in the Paris case, I cannot conceal my puzzlement as a consumer and my regret at the lack of an objectively reliable and comprehensive system for indicating the date of laying of eggs — a date which, without doubt, is of more interest than any other to the consumer; however, having regard to the applicable legislation, I can but suggest that the Court reply as follows to the question submitted by the Verwaltungsgericht Schleswig-Holstein:

1 Original language: Italian.

2 OJ 1975, L 282, p. 56. The Court has given a number of judgments on the regulation at issue: see Case 204/88 Parts [1989] ECR 4361; Case 91/87 Gutlhof-Ei [1988] ECR 2541; Case 130/85 Wulro [1986] ECR 2035. In addition, Case 203/90 is pending.

3 OJ 1984, L 179, p. 2.

4 Judgment in Case 204/88, supra, paragraph 8

5 Case 204/88, supra.

6 It seems to me that Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 (OJ 1990, L 173, p. 5), which has replaced Regulation No 2772/75, represents progress in that direction, in so far as it allows, under certain circumstances, other dates than that of packing to be shown (see the 17th recital and Articles 7 and 10).