Communication: judgment No. 0086 of 2020

IDENTIFIER
62020CA0086
LANGUAGE
English
COURT
Court of Justice of the European Union
AG OPINION
NO
REFERENCES MADE
3
REFERENCED
0
DOCUMENT TYPE
Communication: judgment

Judgment



20.6.2022   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 237/4


Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Krajský soud v Brně — Czech Republic) — Vinařství U Kapličky s.r.o. v Státní zemědělská a potravinářská inspekce

(Case C-86/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common organisation of the markets in agricultural products - Wine - Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 - Rules concerning marketing - Article 80 - Oenological practices - Prohibition on marketing - Article 90 - Imports of wine - Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 - Article 43 - V I 1 document - Certificate of production of consignments of wine in accordance with recommended and authorised oenological practices - Probative value - Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 - Article 89(4) - Penalties - Marketing of wine from a third country - Wine having undergone unauthorised oenological practices - Exoneration from liability - Burden of proof)

(2022/C 237/05)

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Krajský soud v Brně

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Vinařství U Kapličky s.r.o.

Defendant: Státní zemědělská a potravinářská inspekce

Operative part of the judgment

1.

Article 80(2)(a) and (c) and Article 90(3)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 must be interpreted as meaning that the certificate appearing in a V I 1 document, drawn up for a consignment of wine imported into the European Union under Article 43 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 of 27 June 2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine as regards support programmes, trade with third countries, production potential and on controls in the wine sector, according to which that consignment was produced in accordance with oenological practices recommended and published by the International Organisation of Vine and Wine or authorised by the European Union, is relevant in order to determine whether the consignment complies with the oenological practices referred to in Article 80(2)(a) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 1308/2013, but is not sufficient on its own to establish such compliance.

2.

Article 89(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 352/78, (EC) No 165/94, (EC) No 2799/98, (EC) No 814/2000, (EC) No 1290/2005 and (EC) No 485/2008, read in conjunction with Article 80(2) of Regulation No 1308/2013, must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State that provides that, where a person marketing, in that Member State, a consignment of wine imported from a third country that does not comply with the oenological practices referred to in Article 80(2)(a) or (c) of Regulation No 1308/2013 produces a V I 1 document drawn up for that consignment certifying that the consignment has undergone oenological practices recommended and published by the International Organisation of Vine and Wine or authorised by the European Union, the burden of proving the existence of fault on the part of the trader for the infringement of the marketing prohibition provided for in Article 80(2) of Regulation No 1308/2013 is on the competent authorities of that Member State.


(1)  OJ C 137, 27.4.2020.



Citations

Sign up for a free moonlit.ai™ account to access all citing documents.