Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 February 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Oost-Brabant, zittingsplaats ’s-Hertogenbosch — Netherlands) — Criminal proceedings against N.F. Gielen, M.M.J. Geerings, F.A.C. Pruijmboom, A.A. Pruijmboom,

(Case C-369/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Drug precursors - Monitoring of trade between the Member States - Regulation (EC) No 273/2004 - Monitoring of trade between the European Union and third countries - Regulation (EC) No 111/2005 - Concept of ‘scheduled substance’ - Substance ‘alpha-phenylacetoacetonitrile’ (APAAN) - Scheduled substance ‘1-phenyl-2-propanone’ (BMK)))

(2015/C 118/07)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Oost-Brabant, zittingsplaats ’s-Hertogenbosch

Parties in the main criminal proceedings

N.F. Gielen, M.M.J. Geerings, F.A.C. Pruijmboom, A.A. Pruijmboom,

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(a) of Regulation (EC) No 273/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 on drug precursors and Article 2(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 111/2005 of 22 December 2004 laying down rules for the monitoring of trade between the Community and third countries in drug precursors must be interpreted as meaning that the classification of ‘scheduled substance’, within the meaning of those provisions, does not apply to a substance, such as alpha-phenylacetoacetonitrile, which is not referred to in Annex I to Regulation No 273/2004 or the Annex to Regulation No 111/2005, even if it may, by readily applicable or economically viable means, within the meaning of those regulations, easily be converted into a substance referred to in those annexes.

(1)  OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.