Opinion of Advocate General Jacobs delivered on 19 May 1994

1 Original language: English.

2 OJ 1988 L 110, p. 35.

3 OJ 1991 L. 163, p. 13.

4 OJ, English Special Edition, 1970 (I), p. 206.

5 OJ 1989 L 129, p. 16.

6 OJ 1990 L 132, p. 25.

7 Subsequently, Council Regulation (EEC) No 1737/91 (OJ 1991 L 163, p. 11) fixed tile overall maximum guaranteed quantity at 390000 tonnes of leaf tobacco for each of the 1991 to 1993 harvests. Council Regulation (EEC) No 860/92 (OJ 1992 L 91, p. 1) provided that that reduction must not exceed 23 per cent for the 1992 harvest.

8 OJ 1989 L 207, p. 15.

9 OJ 1990 L 187, p. 23.

10 OJ 1991 L 208, p. 26.

11 OJ 1992 L 217, p. 75.

12 OJ 1992 L 215, p. 70.

13 OJ 1992 L 351, p. 11.

14 See Regulation No 2178/92, above, note 10.

15 Joined Cases C-320 to C-322/90 Telemttrsicabruzzo and Others [1993] ECR I-393.

16 Case C-316/93 Vaneetveld v SA Le Foyer, Opinion of 17 January 1994, paragraphs 6 to 11 of the Opinion.

17 Sec Case C-343/90 Lourenço Dua [1992] ECR I-4673, paragraphs 17 to 18 of the judgment.

18 See Case 104/79 Follia v Novello [1980] ECR 745.

19 Telemarsicabruzzo, cited in note, paragraph 6 of the judgment. See also Case C-157/92 Bandiera [1993] ECR I-1085; Case C-386/92 Monin Automobila v French State [1993] ECR I-2049.

20 Judgment of 3 March 1994, paragraph 13.

21 Monin, cited in note.

22 Case C-368/89 [1991] ECR I-3695. See below, paragraph.

23 Case C-83/91 Meilicke [1992] ECR I-4871.

24 See Regulation No 1114/88, preamble, first recital. See below, paragraph.

25 Case C-331/88 Fedesa und Ollien [1990] ECR I-4023, paragraph 24 of the judgment; Case 69/83 Lux v Court of Auditors [1984] ECR 2447, paragraph 30; Case C-323/88 Serines [1990] ECR I-3027, paragraph 33.

26 See Hartley, The Foundations of European Community Law, Second ed., pp. 415-417.

27 See e. g. Case 66/82 Fromançais v FORMA [1983] ECR 395, paragraph 8 of the judgment; Case 15/83 Denkavit Nederland v Hoofdproaitktscbap voor Akkerbouwprodukten [1984] ECR 2171, paragraph 25.

28 Case 138/78 Stoking v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas [1979] ECR 713, paragraph 7 of the judgment.

29 Regulation No 1114/88, preamble, first recital.

30 Op. cit., second recital.

31 See e. g. Joined Cases 279, 280, 285 and 286/84 Ran v Commission [1987] ECR 1069, paragraph 34 of the judgment.

32 Case 5/73 Balkan-Import-Export v Hauptzotlamt Berlin-Packhof [1973] ECR 1091, paragraph 24 of the judgment; Case 203/86 Spain v Council [1988] ECR 4563, paragraph 10.

33 Joined Cases 197 to 200, 243, 245 and 247/80 Lndwigshafener Walzmrihle v Council and Commission [1981] ECR 3211, paragraph 41 of the judgment.

34 See Commission, The development and future of the common agricultural policy, COM(91) 258, EC Bulletin, Supplement 5 of 1991, pp. 9-12 and especially for the sector of tobacco pp. 27-28.

35 See Special Report No 8/93 concerning the common organization of the market in raw tobacco, OJ 1994 C 65, paragraph 1.1.

36 Case 40/72 Schroeder v Germany [1973] ECR 125, paragraph 14 of the judgment. See also Joined Cases 9 and 11/71 Cie d'Approvisionnement v Commission [1972] ECR 391, paragraph 39.

37 Joined Cases C-267/88 to C-285/88 Wuidart and Others [1990] ECR I-435.

38 Case 265/87 Schrader [1989] ECR 2237. paragraphs 21 and 22 of the judgment; Wuidart, cited in note, paragraph 14; Case C-331/8S Fedesa, cited in note, paragraph 14.

39 See Regulation No 2046/90, cited in note, Annex I.

40 See Regulation No 2267/91, cited in note, Annex I.

41 See Regulation No 2178/92, cited in note, Annex I.

42 See e. g. Fedesa, cited in note, paragraph 13 of the judgment.

43 Case C-24/90 [1991] ECR I-4905.

44 Case C-25/90 [1991] ECR I-4939.

45 See Werner Faust, cited in note, paragraphs 19 and 29 of the judgment; Wünsche, cited in note, paragraphs 20 and 30.

46 Case C-8/89 Zardi [1990] ECR I-2515.

47 Paragraph 13 of the judgment.

48 See e. g. Case 106/83 Sermide v Cassa Conguaglio Zucchero [1984] ECR 4209, paragraph 28 of the judgment.

49 Case 179/84 Bozzetti v Invemizzi [1985] ECR2301, paragraph 34 of the judgment.

50 Case C-27/90 [1991] ECR I-133.

51 Paragraph 20 of the judgment.

52 Case 250/84 Eridania v Cassa Conguaglio Zucchero [1986] ECR 117, paragraph 32 of the judgment.

53 See Article 4(5), above, paragraph 7.

54 Case C-350/88 Delacre and Others v Commission [1990] ECR I-395, paragraph 33 of the judgment, Case 245/81 Edeka v Germany [1982] ECR 2745, paragraph 27.

55 Delacre, op. cit., Case 84/78 Tomadini v Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato [1979] ECR 1801, paragraph 22 of the judgment.

56 Delacre, op. cit., paragraph 34 of the judgment, Case 230/78 Eridania v Minister of Agriculture and Forestry [1979] ECR 2749.

57 See Regulation No 2178/92. cited in note 10.

58 OJ 1990 L 132, p. 28.

59 Cited in note 10.

60 Case C-368/89, cited above in note 21.

61 The Council gave effect to the judgment of the Court by adopting Regulations (EEC) Nos 1570/92 (OJ 1992 L 166, p. 6) and 1571/92 (OJ 1992 L 166, p. 7).

62 See Regulation No 1331/90, cited in note, Article 3(3) and Annex V.

63 See Regulation No 1738/91, cited in note, preamble, sixth recital.

64 Case C-241/S9 SARPP [1990] I-1695, paragraph 8 of the judgment. Case C-315/92 Verband Sozialer Wettbelieb eV v Clinique Laboratories SNC and Estéé Lauder Cosmetics GmbH, judgment of 2 February 1994, paragraph 7.

65 Casc 16/65 [1965] ECR 877.

66 Case 44/65 Hessische Knappschaft v Singer [1965] ECR 965, p. 970; Joined Cases C-134 and C-135/91 Kerafina-Keramische mid Finanz-Holding et Vioktimatiki [1992] ECR I-5699, paragraph 16 of the judgment.

67 See Case 283/81 CILFIT v Ministry of Health [1982] ECR 3415, paragraph 9 of the judgment.

68 Sec e. g. Hessische Knappschaft v Singer, cited in note, p. 971.

69 Joined Cases 141 to 143/81 [1982] ECB. 1299, paragraph 6 of the judgment.

70 See Council Regulation (EEC) No 1252/89, OJ 1989 L 129, p. 17, Annex FV.

71 See Regulation No 1331/90, cited in note. Annex IV.

72 Regulation No 1738/91, cited in note, Annex IV.