«(Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 28 EC and 30 EC) – Selling arrangements – National legislation requiring prior packaging and specific labelling for the marketing of deep-frozen bread lawfully produced in a Member State and placed on the market in another Member State after further baking)»

1.. Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect – Obstacles resulting from national provisions regulating selling arrangements in a non-discriminatory way – Concept – Requirement of specific packaging in respect of a given product – Not included (EC Treaty, Art. 30 (now, after amendment, Art. 28 EC))

2.. Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect – Legislation requiring, prior to its sale, packaging of imported pre-baked bread after completion of final baking in the Member State of import – Whether permissible – Condition – Measure which applies without distinction and which does not constitute discrimination against imported products – Assessment by the national court – Possible justification – Protection of public health – Excluded (EC Treaty, Arts 30 and 36 (now, after amendment, Arts 28 EC and 30 EC))

3.. Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect – Treaty provisions – Direct effect – Obligations of national courts – Non-application of national provisions which are incompatible with those provisions (EC Treaty, Art. 30 (now, after amendment, Art. 28 EC))

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) 18 September 2003 (1)

((Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Selling arrangements – National legislation requiring prior packaging and specific labelling for the marketing of deep-frozen bread lawfully produced in a Member State and placed on the market in another Member State after further baking))

In Case C-416/00,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Tribunale Civile di Padova (Italy) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

and

on the interpretation of Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 28 and 30 EC),

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),,

composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Fourth Chamber, acting for the President of the Fifth Chamber, D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur), A. La Pergola, P. Jann and S. von Bahr, Judges,

Advocate General: D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of the Commission of the European Communities by H. van Lier and R. Amorosi, acting as Agents,

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 6 June 2002,

gives the following

Observations to the Court

Reply of the Court

On those grounds,

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),

in answer to the questions referred to it by the Tribunale Civile di Padova by decision of 16 October 2000, hereby rules:

Timmermans

Edward

La Pergola

Jann

von Bahr

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 18 September 2003.

R. Grass

M. Wathelet

Registrar

President of the Fifth Chamber