This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021CN0051
Case C-51/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tallinna Halduskohus (Estonia) lodged on 28 January 2021 — Aktsiaselts M.V.WOOL v Põllumajandus- ja Toiduamet
Case C-51/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tallinna Halduskohus (Estonia) lodged on 28 January 2021 — Aktsiaselts M.V.WOOL v Põllumajandus- ja Toiduamet
Case C-51/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tallinna Halduskohus (Estonia) lodged on 28 January 2021 — Aktsiaselts M.V.WOOL v Põllumajandus- ja Toiduamet
IO C 128, 12.4.2021, p. 21–22
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
12.4.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 128/21 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tallinna Halduskohus (Estonia) lodged on 28 January 2021 — Aktsiaselts M.V.WOOL v Põllumajandus- ja Toiduamet
(Case C-51/21)
(2021/C 128/26)
Language of the case: Estonian
Referring court
Tallinna Halduskohus
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Aktsiaselts M.V.WOOL
Defendant: Põllumajandus- ja Toiduamet (formerly Veterinaar- ja Toiduamet)
Questions referred
|
1. |
Must the second microbiological criterion ‘Absence in 25 g’ set out in Article 3(1) of Regulation No 2073/2005 (1) and point 1.2 of the table in Chapter 1 of Annex I thereto be interpreted, having regard to that regulation, the protection of public health and the objectives pursued by Regulations No 178/2002 (2) and No 882/2004, (3) as meaning that in the case where the food business operator has been unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the competent authority that ready-to-eat foods able to support the growth of L. monocytogenes, other than those intended for infants and for special medical purposes, will not exceed the limit of 100 cfu/g during their shelf-life, the microbiological criterion ‘Absence in 25 g’ then also applies in any event to products placed on the market during their shelf-life? |
|
2. |
If Question 1 is answered in the negative: Must the second microbiological criterion ‘Absence in 25 g’ set out in Article 3(1) of Regulation No 2073/2005 and point 1.2 of the table in Chapter 1 of Annex I thereto be interpreted, having regard to that regulation, the protection of public health and the objectives pursued by Regulations No 178/2002 and No 882/2004, as meaning that, irrespective of whether the food business operator is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the food will not exceed the limit of 100 cfu/g during the shelf-life, two alternative microbiological criteria then apply to that food, namely (1) the criterion ‘Absence in 25 g’ while the food is under the control of the food business operator, and (2) the criterion ‘100 cfu/g’ after the food has left the control of the food business operator? |
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs (OJ 2005 L 338, p. 1).
(2) Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (OJ 2002 L 31, p. 1).
(3) Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules (OJ 2004 L 165, p. 1).