Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T21:26:44.068Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

II. Agriculture, Environment and Fisheries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2008

Karl Newman  and
Francis Snyder
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

By far the most significant recent developments in the field of agriculture stem from the Uruguay Round concluded in Marrakesh on 15 April 1994. Subject to ratification by all signatories, the Final Act and the WTO Agreement may be expected to complement the MacSharry reforms1 in leading to substantial changes in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).2 Of special importance are the Agreement on Agriculture and the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.3 The same may be said of the International Dairy Arrangement4 and of the Arrangement regarding Bovine Meat negotiated bilaterally with Uruguay.5 All these agreements have been approved on behalf of the European Community with regard to matters falling within its competence.6

Type
Current Developments: European Community Law
Information
International & Comparative Law Quarterly , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , July 1996 , pp. 740 - 749
Copyright
Copyright © British Institute of International and Comparative Law 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See (1993) 42 I.C.L.Q. 720.

2. Council Decision (EC) 94/800 (1994) O.J. L336/1: Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (1994) O.J. L336/22.

3. Annex IA to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (1994) O.J. L336/22.

4. Idem, Annex 4 (1994) O.J. L336/290.

5. Idem, Annex 4 (1994) O.J. L336/305.

6. Council Decision 94/800. Art.1 (1994) O.J. L336/1 (WTO Agreement including Annexes): Council Decision 94/800, Art.2(1) (International Dairy Arrangement). Art.3(1) (Arrangement regarding Bovine Meat) (1994) O.J. L336/1. See also Opinion 1/94 World Trade Organization [1994] ECR I–5267.

7. Agreement on Agriculture (1994) O.J. L336/22. Preamble, recitals 2. 3.

8. Domestic support commitments are specified in the Agreement on Agriculture. Arts.6 and 7. Annexes 2.3.4. The basic principle is that domestic support measures must be reduced unless they have no. or at most minimal, trade-distorting effects or effects on production: Art.6(1), Annex 2. para.1.

9. Idem, Preamble, recital 4.

10. Idem, Art.1(f).

11. Idem, Arts.4. 6. 7 and Annexes 2. 3. 4. 5 and attachment to Annex 5 (1994) O.J. L336/22.

12. Idem, Art.5.

13. Idem, Annex 5 (1994) O.J. L336/23.

14. Idem, Art.4(1) (1994) O.J. L336/22.

15. Idem, Art.4(2). These measures include, inter alia, quantitative import restrictions, variable import levies, minimum import prices, discretionary import licensing, non-tariff measures maintained through State-trading enterprises, voluntary export restraints, and similar border measures other than ordinary customs duties: idem, Art.4(2). n.1.

16. Idem, Art.8. “Export subsidies” refers to subsidies contingent upon export performance, including export subsidies listed in idem, Art.9: idem, Art.1(e).

17. Idem, Arts.3(3), 9(2b). 9(4).

18. Idem, Art.3(3). On definition of terms, see Art. 1. The prohibited types of export subsidies are listed in idem, Art.9(1). The specified agricultural products and the budgetary outlay and quantity commitment levels are listed in Section II of Part IV of each member's schedule.

19. See Council Reg.3290/94 on the adjustments and transitional arrangements required in the agricultural sector in order to implement the agreements concluded during the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations (1994) O.J. L349/105.

20. Commission Reg.3719/88, Art.2 (1988) O.J. L331/1, as amended by Commission Reg.1199/95, Art.1 (1995) O.J. L119/4.

21. Commission Reg.1199/95 amending Reg.3719/88 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences and advance-fixing certificates for agricultural products, to take account of the adjustments necessary for implementing the Agreement on Agriculture resulting from the Uruguay Round. Preamble, fourth and fifth recitals (1995) O.J. L119/4. See also Council Reg.3290/94. Preamble, recitals Hand 15(1994) O.J. L349/105. Prior to the Uruguay Round the amount of any export refund to be received (or the amount of any variable levy to be charged) could be fixed in advance of a transaction by advance-fixing certificates, but advance-fixing was not required: see Commission Reg.3719/88, idem, Art.1.

22. Commission Reg.3718/88, idem, Art.33. para.2, last subpara., as inserted by Commission Reg.1199/95. idem, Art.1.

23. Commission Reg.3665/87, Art.20 (1987) O.J. L351/1. For detailed rules regarding the recovery of amounts unduly paid and sanctions, see idem, Art.11, as substituted by Commission Reg.2945/94. Art.1 (1994) O.J. L310/57.

24. The common organisation of the market in cereals is currently laid down in Council Reg. 1766/92 (1992) O.J. L181/21, as amended. Annex B of Reg. 1766/92 has been replaced by Annex B of Commission Reg.2193/93 (1993) O.J. L196/22.

25. Idem, Art.9, as substituted by Council Reg.3290/94, Annex I (1994) O.J. L349/105. Special detailed rules for the application of the system of licences are provided by Commission Reg.l 162/95 (1995) O.J. L117/2.

26. Idem, Art.10(1), as substituted.

27. Idem, Art. 12(1), as substituted. This is subject to the exception set out in “Blair House II”. supra. Detailed rules for administering the quotas are to be adopted according to the management committee procedure: idem, Arts. 12(1), 23. As to the content of these detailed rules, including import quotas for Spain and Portugal, see idem, Art. 12(4).

28. Idem, Art.12(2). The method of administration shall, where appropriate, give due weight to the supply requirements of the Community market and the need to safeguard the equilibrium of that market, whilst at the same time possibly drawing on methods which may have been applied in the past to corresponding quotas, without prejudice to the rights resulting from agreements concluded in the framework of the Uruguay Round negotiations: idem, Art.12(3). as substituted.

29. Idem, Art. 10(2), as substituted. The products are those products covered by CN codes ex 1001 other than merlin. 1002, 1003. ex 1005 other than hybrid seed, and ex 1007 other than hybrid seed for sowing. The charge is equal to the intervention price valid for such products on importation and increased by 55%. minus the c.i.f. import price applicable to the consignment in question: the duty may not exceed the rate of duty in the CCT: Ibid. The method of calculation is laid down in idem, Art.10(3). On detailed rules for the application of these provisions, see idem, Art.10(4).

30. Council Decision 94/800, Annex la. Agreement on Agriculture. Art.5 (1994) O.J. L336/22, as to which see supra.

31. Reg.1766/92, supra n.24, Art.11(1), as substituted. This additional duty may not be imposed, however, if the imports are unlikely to disturb the Community market, or where the effects would be disproportionate to the intended objective: Ibid.

32. Idem, Art.13(5), first para. If the real destination is not the same as that indicated on the licence, the amount applicable shall not exceed the amount applicable for the destination on the licence: idem, Art.13(5)(8b). These provisions concerning granting and amount of refunds may also apply to processed products, that is. those listed in idem, Annex B: see idem, Art.13(6). They may be waived, however, in the case of food-aid products: idem, Art. 13(7).

33. Council Reg.404/93 (1993) O.J. L7/1.

34. See Annex IV of the Treaty of Rome.

35. Fourth Lomé Convention, Preamble and Protocol No.5, Art.1.

36. Lomé V, Annex LXXIV, added Declaration regarding Protocol No.5. Neither the Declaration nor the Protocol applied to Haiti or the Dominican Republic, which were considered to be new signatories of the Lomé Convention and thus excluded from the category of traditional suppliers: see Lomé IV, Annex LXXV, Declaration of the Community regarding Protocol No.5.

37. Reg.404/93. supra n.33.

38. See idem, Preamble, seventh recital.

39. Idem, Art.15a, second para., as added by Council Reg.3290/94 (1994) O.J. L349/105.

40. The specified amounts (in tonnes/net weight) for each country are as follows: Ivory Coast 155,000; Cameroon 155,000; Surinam 38,000; Somalia 60,000; Jamaica 105,000; St Lucia 127,000; St Vincent and the Grenadines; 82,000: Dominica 71.000; Belize 40.000; Cape Verde 4.800; Grenada 14,000; Madagascar 5,900; Reg.404/93, idem, Annex.

41. Idem, Art. 18(1). first para., as substituted by Reg.3290/94, supra n.39. Re-exported bananas, whether non-traditional or third country, are not charged to the tariff quota: idem, Art. 18(3). as so substituted.

42. Commission Reg.478/95. Art.1 (1). Annex I (1995) O.J. L49/13. The groups and shares are:Table 1: Colombia 21.0%. Costa Rica 23.4%, Nicaragua 3.0%. Venezuela 2.0%;Table 2 (non-traditional ACP quantities): Dominican Republic 55,000 tonnes. Belize 15,000 tonnes, Ivory Coast 7.500 tonnes, Cameroon 7,500 tonnes, other ACP countries, 5.000 tonnes; Table 3: Others: 50.6%—90.000 tonnes.

43. The Agreement was necessary because the tariff import arrangements provided in the common organisation of the market for bananas replaced the 20% duty on banana imports which was previously consolidated in GATT. It was concluded with Colombia, Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Venezuela. The Agreement was challenged by Germany, but the ECJ held that it was not necessary to give an opinion because before the case was heard the Agreement had already been concluded: Opinion 3/84 GATT—OMC—Accord-cadre sur les bananes, 13 Dec. 1995, French transcript.

44. Reg.478/95, supran.42. Art.1(2).(3).

45. Reg.404/93, supra n.33, Art.18(1), second para., as substituted (supra n.41). Provision is also made for the volume of the quota to be increased when Community demand in relation to supply increases: see idem, Art.18(1), fourth para., as so substituted.

46. Idem, Art.18(2). as so substituted.

47. Idem, Art.15(1).

48. Idem, Art.21(2).

49. Idem, Art.19(1). first para. The Commission has proposed that the allocation by volume and the administration of the tariff quota should be based on the criterion of effective importation, instead of marketing, and that those provisions be amended accordingly: see (1995)O.J. C136/18.

50. Idem, Art.19(2), first para., which also establishes which categories of sales are to be taken into account. As to access to the quota, see idem, Art.19(1), second para., and Commission Reg.1442/93 (1993) O.J. L142/7. See also Case C–389/93 Anton Dürbeck GmbH v. Bundesaml für Ernährung und Forstwinschaft [1995] ECR I–1509; Case C–478/93 Netherlands v. Commission, judgment of 17 Oct. 1995 (not yet rep.).

51. That is. as set down in Art.39 EC: idem, Art.23. as so substituted. Such measures may be taken only until the disturbance or threat of disturbance has ceased: Ibid.

52. Idem, Art.23(2).

53. Idem, Art.23(3).

54. Quite apart from the fact that it was declared incompatible with the GATT, thus leading to the Framework Agreement on Bananas.

55. Case C–280/93 Germany v. Council [1994] ECR I–4973.

56. Case C–280/93R Germany v. Council [1993] ECR I–3667.

57. In the following cases, the ECJ declared a suit inadmissible for want of direct and individual concern, while at the same time preserving the action in so far as it sought an order requiring the Community to make good any damage caused by the adoption of the Regulation if the action by Germany should lead to the annulment of the regime: Case C–256/93 Pacific Fruit Company NV and Pacific Fruit Company BV v. Council and Commission (1993) O.J. C215/10: Case C–257/93 Leon Van Parijsand Others v. Council and Commission (1993) O J. C215/11; Case C–262/93 Anton Dürbeck GmbH v. Council and Commission (1993) O J. C215/11: Case C–282/93 Comafrica SpA and Others v. Council and Commission (1993) O.J. C215/12: Case C–283/93 Pacific Fruit Company Italy SpA v. Council and Commission (1993) O J. C215/13; Case C–286/93 A tlanta A C and Others v. Council and Commission (1993) O J. C215/13. Several cases for annulment only were dismissed: Case C–276/93 Chiquita Bananas BVand Others v. Council (1993) O.J. C215/12; Case C–287/93 SimbaSpA v. Council (1993) O.J. C215/14. Two applications for interim measures were also dismissed: Case C–282/93R Comafrica SpA and Others v. Council and Commission 6 July 1993. English transcript; Case C–276/93 Chiquita Banana Company BV and Others v. Council 6 July 1993, English transcript.

58. Atlanta Fruchthandelsgesellschaft mbH and Others v. Btindesamt für Ernährung und Forstwirtschafi, judgment of 9 Nov. 1995 (not yet rep.).

59. Case C–466/93 Atlanta Fruchthandelsgesellschaft mbH and Others v. Bundesamt für Ernähntng und Forstwirtschaft, judgment of 9 Nov. 1995 (not yet rep.).

60. Council Decision 95/308 (1995) O.J. L186/42.

61. The Basle Convention, which was settled in 1993, is intended to control transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal (1993) O.J. L377/30.

62. Bull.EU 6–1995, point 1.3.149. In Apr. 1995 the Commission submitted a proposal with regard to implementation of such a prohibition in Community legislation: COM(95) 143. Bull.EU 4–1995. point 1.3.100.

63. Joined Cases C–46/93 and C–48/93 Brasserie du Pêcheur v. Federal Republic of Germany and The Queen v. Secretary of State for Transport, ex p. Factortame Ltd and others, judgment of 5 Mar. 1996 (not yet rep.).

64. Joined Cases C–6/90 and C–9/90 Francovich and Bonifaci v. Italy [1992] ECR I–5357.

65. Namely, specified provisions of the UK Merchant Shipping Act 1988 and the Reinheitsgebot. As to their incompatibility with Community law, see respectively The Queen v. Secretary of State for Transport, ex p. Factortame and others [1990] ECR I–2433 and the REF German beer case.

66. Council Reg.3760/92 (1992) O.J. L388/1.

67. Council Reg.685/95 (1995) O.J. L71/5.

68. Ibid.

69. Established by Council Decision 68/361.

70. Established by Commission Decision 81/651.

71. Europe No.6662 (n.s.). Thurs. 8 Feb. 1996. pp.8–9.

72. Europe No.6666 (n.s.). Wed. 14 Feb. 1996. p.11.

73. Europe No.6693 (n.s.). Fri. 22 Mar. 1996, p.13.

74. Europe No.6695 (n.s.). Mon/Tues. 25/26 Mar. 1996. p.15bis.

75. Europe No.6696 (n.s.). Wed. 27 Mar. 1996. p.8.

76. Europe No.6697 (n.s.). Thurs. 28 Mar. 1996. p.7.

77. Europe No.6698 (n.s.). Fri. 29 Mar. 1996, p.11.