Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:1999:92
Date: 1999-02-25
Language of the case: Portuguese
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: External relations;Commercial policy
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Portugal

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Actions for annulment of measures — Pleas in law — Not possible to rely on the 
GATT rules in order to contest the lawfulness of a Community act — Exceptions — 
Community measure intended to implement a GATT rule or expressly and specifically 
referring thereto 
(EC Treaty, Art. 173 (now, after amendment, Art. 230 EC)) 
2. Acts of the institutions — Publication — Belated publication — Whether the validity 
of the measure is affected — No effect 
3. Acts of the institutions — Council resolution concerning the quality of the drafting of 
Community legislation — No binding effect 
I - 8395 
SUMMARY — CASE C-149/96 
4. Common commercial policy — Community rules — Whether traders have a legitimate 
expectation that an existing situation will be maintained — No legitimate expectation 
5. Community law — Principles — Equal treatment — Discrimination — Meaning 
1. Having regard to their nature and 
structure, World Trade Organisation 
(WTO) agreements are not in principle 
among the rules in the light of which 
the Court is to review the legality of 
measures adopted by the Community 
institutions. 
It is for the Court to review the legality 
of a Community measure in the light of 
the WTO rules only where the Com­
munity intended by means of that 
measure to implement a particular 
obligation assumed in the context of 
the WTO, or where the measure refers 
expressly to the precise provisions of 
the WTO agreements. 
2. The belated publication of a Commu­
nity measure in the Official Journal of 
the European Communities does not 
affect the validity of that measure. 
3. The Council resolution of 8 June 1993 
concerning the quality of the drafting 
of Community legislation has no bind­
ing effect and places no obligation on 
the institutions to follow any particular 
rules when drafting legislative mea­
sures. 
4. The principle of the protection of 
legitimate expectations cannot be 
relied upon to make a regulation unal­
terable, especially in sectors such as 
that of textile imports from non-mem­
ber countries, where it is necessary 
constantly to adjust the rules to accom­
modate changes in the economic situa­
tion, and where, accordingly, such 
changes are reasonably to be expected. 
5. The principle of non-discrimination 
requires that 'comparable situations 
should not be treated in a different 
manner unless the difference in treat­
ment is objectively justified'. 
I - 8396