EuGH · C-238/25 · 05.11.2026 · ECLI:EU:C:2026:928
Provisional text
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (First Chamber)
5 November 2026 (*)
( Reference for a preliminary ruling – Approximation of laws – Directive 2014/31/EU – Non-automatic weighing instruments – Concept – Essential requirements – Additional requirements for instruments for direct sales to the public with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg – Measuring instrument recording the weighing result without printing or visibly displaying it – Terminology of the International Organisation of Legal Metrology (OIML) – Technical standards and regulations – Harmonised standard EN 45501:2015 )
In Case C‑238/25,
REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court, Germany), made by decision of 16 October 2024, received at the Court on 27 March 2025, in the proceedings
Land Nordrhein-Westfalen
v
Bizerba SE & Co. KG,
interested party:
Vertreterin des Bundesinteresses beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht,
THE COURT (First Chamber),
composed of F. Biltgen, President of the Chamber, S. Gervasoni, A. Kumin, I. Ziemele and M. Bošnjak (Rapporteur), Judges,
Advocate General: A. Biondi,
Registrar: E. Sartori, Administrator,
having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 12 February 2026,
after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:
– the Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, by H.‑J. Müggenborg, Rechtsanwalt, and E. Petit,
– Bizerba SE & Co. KG, by D. Büge and C. Ziegler, Rechtsanwälte,
– the German Government, by J. Möller and P.‑L. Krüger, acting as Agents,
– the Greek Government, by V. Karra, K. Konsta, A. Magrippi and K. Tagkli, acting as Agents,
– the Austrian Government, by A. Posch, J. Schmoll and T. Ganglbauer, acting as Agents,
– the European Commission, by T.S. Bohr and M. Owsiany-Hornung, acting as Agents,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 7 May 2026,
gives the following
Judgment
1 This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 2(1) and (2) of Directive 2014/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the making available on the market of non-automatic weighing instruments (OJ 2014 L 96, p. 107).
2 The request has been made in proceedings between the Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (Land of North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany) and Bizerba SE & Co. KG (‘Bizerba’) concerning the prohibition imposed on Bizerba against the use, for the purpose of manufacturing weighing instruments in the territory of that Land, of devices on which the CE marking or supplementary metrology marking has been affixed prior to the completion of the conformity assessment.
Legal context
European Union law
Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012
3 Article 2(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on European standardisation, amending Council Directives 89/686/EEC and 93/15/EEC and Directives 94/9/EC, 94/25/EC, 95/16/EC, 97/23/EC, 98/34/EC, 2004/22/EC, 2007/23/EC, 2009/23/EC and 2009/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Decision 87/95/EEC and Decision No 1673/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2012 L 316, p. 12), provides:
‘For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) “standard” means a technical specification, adopted by a recognised standardisation body, for repeated or continuous application, with which compliance is not compulsory, and which is one of the following:
…
(c) “harmonised standard” means a European standard adopted on the basis of a request made by the [European] Commission for the application of Union harmonisation legislation;
…’
4 Under Article 10(6) of that regulation:
‘Where a harmonised standard satisfies the requirements which it aims to cover and which are set out in the corresponding Union harmonisation legislation, the Commission shall publish a reference of such harmonised standard without delay in the Official Journal of the European Union or by other means in accordance with the conditions laid down in the corresponding act of Union harmonisation legislation.’
Directive 2014/31
5 Recital 5 of Directive 2014/31 states:
‘Member States should have the responsibility of protecting the public against incorrect results of weighing operations by means of non-automatic weighing instruments when used for certain categories of applications.’
6 Article 1 of that directive is worded as follows:
‘1. This Directive shall apply to all non-automatic weighing instruments.
2. For the purposes of this Directive, the following categories of use of non-automatic weighing instruments shall be distinguished:
(a) determination of mass for commercial transactions;
(b) determination of mass for the calculation of a toll, tariff, tax, bonus, penalty, remuneration, indemnity or similar type of payment;
(c) determination of mass for the application of laws or regulations or for an expert opinion given in court proceedings;
(d) determination of mass in the practice of medicine for weighing patients for the purposes of monitoring, diagnosis and medical treatment;
(e) determination of mass for making up medicines on prescription in a pharmacy and determination of mass in analyses carried out in medical and pharmaceutical laboratories;
(f) determination of price on the basis of mass for the purposes of direct sales to the public and the making-up of prepackages;
(g) all applications other than those listed in points (a) to (f).’
7 Article 2 of that directive provides:
‘For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) “weighing instrument” means a measuring instrument serving to determine the mass of a body by using the action of gravity on that body. A weighing instrument may also serve to determine other mass-related magnitudes, quantities, parameters or characteristics;
(2) “non-automatic weighing instrument” or “instrument” means a weighing instrument requiring the intervention of an operator during weighing;
…
(11) “harmonised standard” means harmonised standard as defined in point (c) of point 1 of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012;
…’
8 Under Article 3(1) of that directive:
‘Member States shall take all steps to ensure that only instruments that meet the applicable requirements of this Directive may be made available on the market.’
9 Article 4 of Directive 2014/31 provides:
‘Instruments used or intended to be used for the applications listed in points (a) to (f) of Article 1(2) shall satisfy the essential requirements set out in Annex I.
Where the instrument includes, or is connected to, devices which are not used or intended to be used for the applications listed in points (a) to (f) of Article 1(2), such devices shall not be subject to those essential requirements.’
10 Article 12 of that directive provides:
‘Instruments which are in conformity with harmonised standards or parts thereof the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union shall be presumed to be in conformity with the essential requirements set out in Annex I covered by those standards or parts thereof.’
11 Annex I to that directive is worded as follows:
‘Essential requirements
The terminology used is that of the International Organisation of Legal Metrology [(OIML)].
Preliminary observation
Where an instrument includes, or is connected to, more than one indicating or printing device used for the applications listed in points (a) to (f) of Article 1(2), those devices which repeat the results of the weighing operation and which cannot influence the correct functioning of the instrument shall not be subject to the essential requirements if the weighing results are printed or recorded correctly and indelibly by a part of the instrument which meets the essential requirements and the results are accessible to both parties concerned by the measurement. However, in the case of instruments used for direct sales to the public, display and printing devices for the vendor and the customer must fulfil the essential requirements.
Metrological requirements
…
5. Weighing results of an instrument shall be repeatable, and shall be reproducible by the other indicating devices used and in accordance with other methods of balancing used.
…
Design and construction
8. General requirements
8.1. Design and construction of the instruments shall be such that the instruments will preserve their metrological qualities when properly used and installed and when used in an environment for which they are intended. The value of the mass must be indicated.
…
8.3. …
Digital electronic devices shall always exercise adequate control of the correct operation of the measuring process, of the indicating device, and of all data storage and data transfer.
…
9. Indication of weighing results and other weight values
The indication of the weighing results and other weight values shall be accurate, unambiguous and non-misleading and the indicating device shall permit easy reading of the indication under normal conditions of use.
…
14. Instruments for direct sales to the public, with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg: additional requirements
Instruments for direct sale to the public shall show all essential information about the weighing operation and, in the case of price-indicating instruments, shall clearly show the customer the price calculation of the product to be purchased.
…
Price-computing instruments shall display the essential indications long enough for the customer to read them properly.
…
Instruments similar to those normally used for direct sales to the public which do not satisfy the requirements of this Section must carry near to the display the indelible marking “Not to be used for direct sale to the public”.
15. …’
Standard EN 45501:2015
12 The references of standard EN 45501:2015, entitled ‘Metrological aspects of non-automatic weighing instruments’, appear in the Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive [2014/31] (OJ 2016 C 14, p. 100).
13 Point T.1.3 of that standard, entitled ‘Indications of an instrument’, contains the following definition:
‘Value of a quantity provided by a measuring instrument.
NOTE “Indication”, “indicate” or “indicating” includes both displaying and/or printing.’
14 Point 4.13 of that standard, entitled ‘Instruments for direct sale to the public’, states:
‘The following requirements apply to an instrument of class II, III or IIII with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg designed to be used for direct sales to the public …’
15 Point 4.13.1 of that standard, entitled ‘Primary indications’, states:
‘On an instrument for direct sales to the public the primary indications are the weighing result and information about correct zero position, tare and preset tare operations.’
16 Point 4.13.6 of standard EN 45501:2015, entitled ‘Visibility’, states, in the first paragraph thereof:
‘All primary indications (4.13.1 …) shall be indicated clearly and simultaneously to both the vendor and the customer. If this is not possible with one display device two sets are necessary, one set each for the vendor and the customer.’
German law
17 Paragraph 6(1) and (2) of the Gesetz über das Inverkehrbringen und die Bereitstellung von Messgeräten auf dem Markt, ihre Verwendung und Eichung sowie über Fertigpackungen (Mess- und Eichgesetz – MessG) (Law on the placing and making available of measuring instruments on the market, their use and calibration, as well as on prepackages) of 25 July 2013 (BGBl. 2013 I, p. 2722), in the version applicable to the main proceedings, provides:
‘1. … measuring instruments may only be placed on the market if the requirements set out in subparagraphs 2 to 5 are met.
2. Measuring instruments shall fulfil the essential requirements; that includes compliance with maximum permissible errors. Essential requirements within the meaning of the first sentence are the requirements that
(1) are laid down in the statutory instrument pursuant to Paragraph 30(1), or
(2) must be met in order to conform to the state of the art so as to ensure correct measurement results and measurements, subject to more precise provisions in the statutory instrument adopted pursuant to Paragraph 30(1).’
18 Paragraph 8(1) of the Verordnung über das Inverkehrbringen und die Bereitstellung von Messgeräten auf dem Markt sowie über ihre Verwendung und Eichung (Mess- und Eichverordnung – MessEV) (Regulation on the placing and making available of measuring instruments on the market and on their use and calibration) of 11 December 2014 (BGBl. 2014 I, p. 2010, 2011), in the version applicable to the dispute in the main proceedings, provides:
‘… The following measuring instruments or sub-assemblies, within the meaning of Directive 2014/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the making available on the market of measuring instruments (OJ 2014 L 96, p. 149), in the version in force, and within the meaning of Directive [2014/31], in the version in force, must meet the specific requirements applicable to them, which are referred to in column 3 of Table 1 in Annex 3 for each of the measuring instruments concerned:
…
(11) non-automatic weighing instruments (short form: “EU weighing instruments – non-automatic”).’
19 Column 3 of number 11 of Table 1 in Annex 3 of that regulation states that the specific essential requirements that non-automatic weighing instruments must meet are to be determined in accordance with Annex I to Directive 2014/31.
The dispute in the main proceedings and the question referred for a preliminary ruling
20 Bizerba manufactures, in a factory in Baden-Württemberg (Germany), a model of a weighing instrument that is integrated into checkout systems produced by other manufacturers and used in retail trade. The weighing results are recorded by the instrument concerned, which transmits them to the cash register computer via an interface that does not permit any falsification of the measured values. Those results are displayed for customers and other users to see on the checkout system screen, through a software module licensed by Bizerba.
21 In February 2019, during the inspection of a checkout system, the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia found that a metrological marking indicated the year 2016, which suggested that that checkout system had been in conformity with all the applicable requirements since that year, whereas the instrument manufactured by Bizerba had not been connected to the display terminal until 2017. According to that Land, it was only through that connection that a weighing instrument was created, thus enabling the conformity assessment to be completed.
22 On 31 January 2020, the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia adopted an administrative decision prohibiting Bizerba from using, for the purpose of manufacturing weighing instruments in the territory of that Land as from 1 April 2020, devices on which the CE marking or supplementary metrology marking had been affixed prior to the completion of the conformity assessment.
23 Hearing an action for annulment brought by Bizerba, the Verwaltungsgericht Köln (Administrative Court, Cologne, Germany), by a judgment of 21 April 2021, annulled that administrative decision on the ground that Bizerba had not failed to comply with either the requirements or the conformity assessment procedure applicable to non-automatic weighing instruments. By a judgment of 8 September 2022, the Oberverwaltungsgericht Nordrhein-Westfalen (Higher Administrative Court for the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany) dismissed the appeal brought by the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia against that judgment.
24 The Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court, Germany), which is the referring court, is hearing an appeal on a point of law (Revision), by which that Land claims that the instrument concerned cannot be placed on the market as a ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’, since it does not have its own indicating device.
25 The referring court states that, under German law, the essential requirements applicable to non-automatic weighing instruments are to be determined in accordance with Annex I to Directive 2014/31. That court is uncertain whether classification as a ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’, within the meaning of that directive, requires the weighing results to be displayed, or whether it is sufficient that those results are recorded by the instrument concerned and that they are visually shown by means of an external display device.
26 According to the referring court, that display is an essential element of any non-automatic weighing instrument, having regard to the wording of Annex I to Directive 2014/31 and the objectives of that directive, in particular consumer protection.
27 That court observes that it is apparent from the terminology of the OIML, cited in the sentence preceding the preliminary observation in Annex I to Directive 2014/31, and from standard EN 45501:2015, which is a harmonised standard the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, that the ‘indication’ of weighing results may include not only their visual representation but also their memorisation.
28 The referring court states, however, that that terminology cannot lead to the provisions of Directive 2014/31 being given a meaning which they do not have. In addition, the hierarchy of norms of EU law precludes a harmonised standard from derogating from the provisions of an act of secondary legislation.
29 In those circumstances the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
‘Does a measuring instrument also constitute a non-automatic weighing instrument within the meaning of points 1 and 2 of Article 2 of [Directive 2014/31] if the weighing result is not printed or visibly displayed, but merely recorded?’
The request to reopen the oral part of the procedure
30 By document lodged at the Registry of the Court of Justice on 4 July 2026, the Land of North-Rhine Westphalia requested the reopening of the oral part of the procedure, pursuant to Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice.
31 In support of that request, that Land has submitted, in essence, that certain aspects of the present case were not sufficiently debated at the hearing and that it disagrees with some of the assessments set out in the Advocate General’s Opinion.
32 Pursuant to Article 83 of its Rules of Procedure, the Court may at any time, after hearing the Advocate General, order the reopening of the oral part of the procedure, in particular if it considers that it lacks sufficient information or where a party has, after the close of that part of the procedure, submitted a new fact which is of such a nature as to have a decisive bearing on the decision of the Court, or where the case must be decided on the basis of an argument which has not been debated between the parties or the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
33 In that regard, it should be pointed out, first, that the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Rules of Procedure make no provision for the parties to submit observations in response to the Advocate General’s Opinion. Second, under the second paragraph of Article 252 TFEU, it is the duty of the Advocate General, acting with complete impartiality and independence, to make, in open court, reasoned submissions on cases which, in accordance with the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, require his or her involvement. The Court is not bound either by the Advocate General’s Opinion or by the reasoning which led thereto. As a consequence, the fact that a party disagrees with the Advocate General’s Opinion, irrespective of the questions examined in the Opinion, cannot in itself constitute grounds justifying the reopening of the oral part of the procedure (see, to that effect, judgment of 12 May 2026, Meta Platforms Ireland (Fair compensation), C‑797/23, EU:C:2026:395, paragraph 25 and the case-law cited).
34 Second, in the light of all the information available to it, the Court considers, in any event, that it has sufficient information to rule on the request for a preliminary ruling.
35 In those circumstances, the Court considers, after hearing the Advocate General, that there is no need to order that the oral part of the procedure be reopened.
Consideration of the question referred
36 As a preliminary point, it should be recalled that, according to settled case-law, in the procedure laid down by Article 267 TFEU providing for cooperation between national courts and the Court of Justice, it is for the latter to provide the national court with an answer which will be of use to it and enable it to decide the case before it. To that end, the Court should, where necessary, reformulate the questions referred to it. It is for the Court to extract from all the information provided by the national court, in particular from the grounds of the order for reference, the points of EU law which require interpretation, having regard to the subject matter of the dispute (judgments of 29 November 1978, Redmond, 83/78, EU:C:1978:214, paragraph 26, and of 4 June 2026, Safi, C‑147/24, EU:C:2026:442, paragraph 24).
37 In the present case, the referring court is uncertain as regards the concept of ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’. That concept is defined in Article 2(1) and (2) of Directive 2014/31 by reference, inter alia, to the function performed by the instruments concerned, without taking into consideration the manner in which they are used or the areas in which they are used (see, to that effect, judgment of 4 July 2024, Marhon, C‑283/23 P, EU:C:2024:569, paragraph 30).
38 It is apparent from the request for a preliminary ruling that the referring court seeks to determine whether the instrument at issue in the main proceedings may be placed on the market as a ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’. Such placing on the market presupposes not only that that instrument is a ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’, but also, in particular, that it meets the applicable requirements of Directive 2014/31, in accordance with Article 3(1) thereof, which include the essential requirements that are set out in Annex I to that directive and referred to in Article 4 thereof, to which, moreover, the German legislation applicable in the main proceedings expressly points.
39 In those circumstances, the view must be taken that, by its question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 2(1) and (2) of, and Annex I to, Directive 2014/31 must be interpreted as meaning that a weighing instrument that records the weighing results, without itself printing them or visibly displaying them, constitutes a ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’, within the meaning of that provision, and, if so, whether it is liable to meet the essential requirements set out in that annex.
40 As regards the first part of that question, it must be recalled that, in accordance with Article 1(1) thereof, Directive 2014/31 applies to all ‘non-automatic weighing instruments’, the concept of which is defined in Article 2(2) of that directive as ‘a weighing instrument requiring the intervention of an operator during weighing’. The concept of ‘weighing instrument’, for its part, is defined in Article 2(1) of that directive as a measuring instrument serving to determine the mass of a body by using the action of gravity on that body, and that may also serve to determine other mass-related magnitudes, quantities, parameters or characteristics. Those definitions, according to their wording, do not require a display device or printing device.
41 Thus, a measuring instrument which, like that at issue in the main proceedings, records the weighing results, serves to determine the mass of a body by using the action of gravity on that body, and, accordingly, corresponds to the definition of ‘weighing instrument’ in Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/31.
42 The fact that such an instrument does not itself print or display the weighing results visibly is irrelevant in that regard. The mass is ‘determined’ once it is recorded, irrespective of the way in which the users of the instrument concerned become aware of it.
43 Where, as in the present case, such an instrument requires the intervention of an operator during weighing, it constitutes a ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’, within the meaning of Article 2(2) of that directive, and, accordingly, comes within the scope of that directive pursuant to Article 1(1) thereof.
44 As regards the second part of the question referred, it should be noted at the outset that, in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 4 of Directive 2014/31, instruments used or intended to be used for the applications listed in Article 1(2)(a) to (f) of that directive, which include, inter alia, those relating to determination of mass for commercial transactions and to determination of price on the basis of mass for the purposes of direct sales to the public and the making-up of prepackages, set out in points (a) and (f) of that provision, respectively, must meet the requirements set out in Annex I to that directive.
45 According to settled case-law, the terms of a provision of EU law which makes no express reference to the law of the Member States for the purpose of determining its meaning and scope must normally be given an independent and uniform interpretation throughout the European Union, having regard not only to the wording of that provision but also to the context in which it occurs and the objectives pursued by the rules of which it is part (see judgments of 18 January 1984, Ekro, 327/82, EU:C:1984:11, paragraph 11, and of 18 December 2025, Slagelse Almennyttige Boligselskab, Afdeling Schackenborgvænge, C‑417/23, EU:C:2025:1017, paragraph 76).
46 In the first place, as regards the wording of the provisions of Annex I to Directive 2014/31, several points of that annex presuppose that the users of a non-automatic weighing instrument are in a position to know the weighing results. Thus, under point 8.1 of Annex I to that directive, the value of the mass ‘must be indicated’.
47 Furthermore, point 9 of Annex I to that directive states, first, that the indication of the weighing results and other weight values is to be accurate, unambiguous and non-misleading and, second, that the indicating device is to permit easy reading of the indication under normal conditions of use. It follows that, where the instrument concerned is used under normal conditions, that indication must be capable of being visually perceived by the users, via an indicating device.
48 However, it is not clear from the wording of those provisions or, as the Advocate General observed, in essence, in points 42 and 43 of his Opinion, from that of the other provisions of Annex I to Directive 2014/31 that a display device or printing device must be integrated, as a necessary component, into every non-automatic weighing instrument, so as to communicate the weighing results directly to the users, without the intermediary of an external indicating device.
49 On the contrary, the first sentence of the preliminary remark in Annex I to that directive refers to the situation in which an instrument ‘includes’ or ‘is connected’ to more than one indicating or printing device, those two situations being considered to be equivalent for the purposes of that situation, which suggests that a non-automatic weighing instrument may nevertheless meet the essential requirements set out in Annex I, even though it does not have an indicating device as one such component.
50 Nor is it apparent from the first subparagraph of point 5 of Annex I to that directive, according to which the weighing results of an instrument are to be repeatable and are to be reproducible by the other indicating devices used by that instrument, that every non-automatic weighing instrument must include as one of its components at least one indicating device. In that regard, while it is true that the term ‘other’ implies the existence of a first indicating device, it does not imply that that indicating device is integrated into that instrument.
51 Similarly, it is true that, as regards instruments comprising digital electronic devices, the second subparagraph of point 8.3 of Annex I to Directive 2014/31, pursuant to which those devices are to always exercise adequate control, inter alia, of the indicating device, does imply, at the very least, that an indicating device should be connected to the digital electronic device, but it does not support the conclusion that the former must be a component of the latter.
52 However, point 14 of Annex I to Directive 2014/31 lays down additional requirements applicable to instruments for direct sales to the public with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg, such as the instrument at issue in the main proceedings.
53 In accordance with the first subparagraph of that point, such instruments are to show all essential information about the weighing operation and, in the case of price-indicating instruments, to clearly show the customer the price calculation of the product to be purchased.
54 It is clear from that provision that, in order to be used for direct sales to the public, an instrument must supply the information in question directly to the users, which means that a display device or printing device must be integrated into that instrument.
55 The same is true of price-computing instruments, since the third paragraph of point 14 of Annex I to Directive 2014/31 states that they are to display the essential indications long enough for the customer to read them properly.
56 The interpretation set out in paragraph 54 above is supported by the ninth paragraph of point 14 of Annex I to that directive, which states that instruments similar to those normally used for direct sales to the public which do not satisfy the requirements of that section must carry near to the display the indelible marking ‘Not to be used for direct sale to the public’. In that context, the display device can only be a component of the instrument concerned, since that marking refers to that instrument and not to an external device.
57 As is clear from the second sentence of the preliminary remark in Annex I to Directive 2014/31, those additional requirements, set out in point 14 of Annex I to that directive, are without prejudice to the possible presence of one or more other display or printing devices for the seller and for the customer, which must also meet the essential requirements set out in that annex.
58 In the second place, as regards the context in which Annex I to Directive 2014/31 occurs, first, the reference preceding the preliminary remark in that annex states that the terminology used is that of the OIML. Therefore, that terminology, which appears in Recommendation R 76-1 of 2006 of the OIML, relating to non-automatic weighing instruments, and in the ‘International Vocabulary of terms in legal metrology’ of that international organisation, may provide useful guidance for determining the meaning of certain expressions used in the provisions of that annex.
59 Point T.1.3 of Recommendation R 76-1 of 2006 and point 0.03 of the ‘International Vocabulary of terms in legal metrology’ do not rule out the possibility that, depending on the wording of the relevant provisions of Directive 2014/31, the terms ‘indication’ and ‘show’ refer to the mere output of information, to an output visible to users or to an output visible to users provided by a component of the instrument concerned.
60 Furthermore, although it is clear from point T.2.4 of Recommendation R 76-1 of 2006 that a ‘displaying device’ is the part of an instrument that provides the weighing result in visual form, it does not follow from that either that every non-automatic weighing instrument must include, among its components, an indicating device or that such a component is not required for instruments for direct sales to the public with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg.
61 Second, standard EN 45501:2015, entitled ‘Metrological aspects of non-automatic weighing instruments’, constitutes a ‘harmonised standard’ within the meaning of Article 2(11) of Directive 2014/31, namely a European standard adopted on the basis of a request made by the Commission for the application of EU harmonisation legislation. The references of standard EN 45501:2015 were published in the Official Journal of the European Union, in accordance with Article 10(6) of Regulation No 1025/2012.
62 In that regard, it should be recalled that a harmonised standard, adopted on the basis of a directive and the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, forms part of EU law owing to its legal effects (judgment of 5 March 2024, Public.Resource.Org and Right to Know v Commission and Others, C 588/21 P, EU:C:2024:201, paragraph 70 and the case-law cited).
63 More specifically, it is clear from Article 12 of Directive 2014/31 that instruments which are in conformity with harmonised standards the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union are to be presumed to be in conformity with the essential requirements set out in Annex I to that directive ‘covered’ by those standards.
64 In the present case, it is clear from point 4.13.6 of standard EN 45501:2015, read in the light of points T.1.3, 4.13 and 4.13.1 of that standard, that, as regards instruments for direct sales to the public with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg, the weighing results must be displayed or printed, but there is no requirement for the instrument concerned itself to display or print them.
65 In that regard, standard EN 45501:2015 departs from the wording of point 14 of Annex I to Directive 2014/31. Accordingly, to that extent, conformity with that standard cannot give rise to a presumption of conformity with the additional requirements set out in point 14 of that annex, and that standard cannot lead to an interpretation of point 14 of Annex I to Directive 2014/31 that is different from that set out in paragraph 54 above.
66 In the third place, as regards the purpose of Directive 2014/31, that directive seeks, inter alia, to protect the public against incorrect results of weighing operations, as stated in recital 5 thereof.
67 In the light of that objective, the interpretation to the effect that instruments for direct sales to the public with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg must meet, further to the essential requirements applicable to all non-automatic weighing instruments, additional requirements, inter alia the requirement that those instruments must show directly all essential information about the weighing operation and, in the case of price-indicating instruments, must clearly show the customer the price calculation of the product to be purchased, in order to ensure enhanced protection for customers, for whom the weighing results determine the price to be paid, is compatible with that objective.
68 In the light of all the foregoing, the answer to the question referred is that Article 2(1) and (2) of, and Annex I to, Directive 2014/31 must be interpreted as meaning that a weighing instrument that records the weighing results, without itself printing them or visibly displaying them, constitutes a ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’, within the meaning of that provision, and is liable to meet the essential requirements set out in that annex, with the exception of the additional requirements set out in point 14 of that annex relating to instruments for direct sales to the public with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg.
Costs
69 Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the referring court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.
On those grounds, the Court (First Chamber) hereby rules:
Article 2(1) and (2) of, and Annex I to, Directive 2014/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the making available on the market of non-automatic weighing instruments
must be interpreted as meaning that a weighing instrument that records the weighing results, without itself printing them or visibly displaying them, constitutes a ‘non-automatic weighing instrument’, within the meaning of that provision, and is liable to meet the essential requirements set out in that annex, with the exception of the additional requirements set out in point 14 of that annex relating to instruments for direct sales to the public with a maximum capacity not greater than 100 kg.
[Signatures]
* Language of the case: German.