Judgment_paragraph 46 · The Queen, on the application of ABNA Ltd and Others v Secretary of State for Health and Food Standards Agency, Fratelli Martini & C. SpA and Cargill Srl v Ministero delle Politiche Agricole e Forestali and Others, Ferrari Mangimi Srl and Associazione nazionale tra i produttori di alimenti zootecnici (Assalzoo) v Ministero delle Politiche Agricole e Forestali and Others and Nederlandse Vereniging Diervoederindustrie (Nevedi) v Productschap Diervoeder (C-453/03, C-11/04, C-12/04, C-194/04)

46The Court has also stressed that it is important for the referring court to set out the precise reasons why it was unsure as to the interpretation of Community law and why it considered it necessary to refer questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling. The Court has thus ruled that it is essential that the referring court provide at the very least some explanation of the reasons for the choice of the Community provisions which it requires to be interpreted and of the link it establishes between those provisions and the national legislation applicable to the dispute (see, inter alia, the order in Viacom, cited above, paragraph 16, and the judgment in Case C-318/00 Bacardi-Martini and Cellier des Dauphins [2003] ECR I-905, paragraph 43).