Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62008CN0033

    Case C-33/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof, Austria lodged on 28 January 2008 — AGRANA Zucker GmbH v Bundesminister für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft

    OJ C 92, 12.4.2008, p. 14–15 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    12.4.2008   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 92/14

    Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof, Austria lodged on 28 January 2008 — AGRANA Zucker GmbH v Bundesminister für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft

    (Case C-33/08)

    (2008/C 92/26)

    Language of the case: German

    Referring court

    Verwaltungsgerichtshof

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: AGRANA Zucker GmbH

    Defendant: Bundesminister für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft

    Questions referred

    1.

    Must Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 of 20 February 2006 be interpreted as meaning that even a sugar quota which cannot be utilised as a consequence of a preventive withdrawal in accordance with Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 493/2006 of 27 March 2006 must be included in the assessment of the temporary restructuring amount?

    2.

    In the event that the first question is answered in the affirmative:

    Is Article 11 of Regulation No 320/2006 compatible with primary law, in particular with the principle of non-discrimination and the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations derived from Article 34 EC?
    Top