This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62001CJ0095
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 5 February 2004. # Criminal proceedings against John Greenham and Léonard Abel. # Reference for a preliminary ruling: Tribunal de grande instance de Paris - France. # Free movement of goods - Articles 28 EC and 30 EC - Prohibition on marketing foodstuffs to which vitamins and minerals have been added - Justification - Proportionality. # Case C-95/01.
Sentenza tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (is-Sitt Awla) tal-5 ta' Frar 2004.
Proċedura kriminali vs John Greenham u Léonard Abel.
Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari: Tribunal de grande instance de Paris - Franza.
Moviment liberu tal-merkanzija - Artikolus 28 KE u 30 KE.
Kawża C-95/01.
Sentenza tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (is-Sitt Awla) tal-5 ta' Frar 2004.
Proċedura kriminali vs John Greenham u Léonard Abel.
Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari: Tribunal de grande instance de Paris - Franza.
Moviment liberu tal-merkanzija - Artikolus 28 KE u 30 KE.
Kawża C-95/01.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2004:71
*A9* Tribunal de grande instance de Paris, 31e chambre, jugement du 19/02/2001 (99/2590488)
«(Free movement of goods – Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Prohibition on marketing foodstuffs to which vitamins and minerals have been added – Justification – Proportionality)»
|
||||
|
||||
(Arts 28 EC and 30 EC)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)
5 February 2004 (1)
((Free movement of goods – Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Prohibition on marketing foodstuffs to which vitamins and minerals have been added – Justification – Proportionality))
In Case C-95/01, REFERENCE to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Tribunal de grande instance de Paris (France) for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings pending before that court against John Greenhamand
Léonard Abel, on the interpretation of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC,THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),,
after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:
having regard to the Report for the Hearing,
after hearing the oral observations of Mr Greenham and Mr Abel, of the French Government, of the Greek Government and of the Commission at the hearing on 18 April 2002,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 16 May 2002,
gives the following
On those grounds,
THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),
in answer to the question referred to it by the Tribunal de grande instance de Paris by judgment of 19 February 2001, hereby rules: Articles 28 EC and 30 EC must be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude a Member State from prohibiting the marketing without prior authorisation of foodstuffs lawfully manufactured and marketed in another Member State, where nutrients such as vitamins or minerals have been added thereto other than those whose use has been declared lawful in the first Member State, provided that certain conditions are satisfied. First, the prior authorisation procedure must be readily accessible and capable of being completed within a reasonable time and, if it leads to a refusal, the decision of refusal must be open to challenge before the courts. Secondly, refusal to authorise marketing must be based on a detailed assessment of the risk to public health, based on the most reliable scientific data available and the most recent results of international research.
Skouris |
Gulmann |
Puissochet |
Macken |
Colneric |
|
R. Grass |
V. Skouris |
Registrar |
President |