Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:1998:234
Date: 1998-10-01
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Fourth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Transport
Concepts: Statement of reasons;Inland waterway transport
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Netherlands

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Transport — Inland waterway transport — Structural improvements — Contribution to 
scrapping fund — Exemption for specialised vessels — To be narrowly construed — Vessel 
intended for the carriage of goods other than those for which it is specially designed — Not 
covered 
(Council Regulation No 1101/89, Art. 8(3)(c)) 
2. Acts of the institutions — Statement of reasons — Obligation — Scope — Decision refusing, 
in the context of the structural improvement of inland waterway transport, to exempt the 
owner of a new vessel from the obligation to contribute to the scrapping fund 
(EC Treaty. Art. 190; Council Regulation No 1101/89, Art. 8(3)(c)) 
II - 3921 
SUMMARY — CASE T-155/97 
1. Article 8(3)(c) of Regulation N o 1101/89 
on structural improvements in inland 
waterway transport, which exempts the 
owner of a new vessel — where this is a 
'specialised' vessel — from the obligation 
to pay a contribution to the scrapping 
fund, even where he scraps no vessel, 
must be narrowly construed having 
regard to the aim of the Regulation, in so 
far as it is a derogation from the rules 
generally applicable. 
Thus, where a new vessel is intended for 
the transport of goods other than certain 
dangerous substances, and on that 
account contributes to the increase in car­
rying capacity of the fleets used for the 
transport of other goods, a sector which 
already suffers from overcapacity, its 
bringing into service runs counter to the 
objectives of Regulation N o 1101/89 and 
cannot therefore qualify for the exemp­
tion in question. In that connection, it is 
irrelevant that the vessel operates in a 
separate branch of the inland waterways 
transport market since, in order to deter­
mine whether the bringing into service of 
a new vessel aggravates existing overca­
pacity in the sector, it is necessary to take 
into account the inland waterway trans­
port market as a whole. 
2. The purpose of the obligation to state 
reasons for a decision affecting a person is 
to enable the Community judicature to 
exercise its power of review as to the 
legality of the decision and to enable the 
person concerned to ascertain the matters 
justifying the measure adopted, so that he 
can defend his rights and verify whether 
the decision is well founded. Thus the 
Commission is not under a duty to take a 
position on every argument relied upon 
by the parties concerned in support of 
their case, and need only set out the 
essential facts and legal considerations 
underpinning the decision. 
Specifically, in the case of a decision pur­
suant to Article 8(3)(c) of Regulation N o 
1101/89 refusing to exempt the owner of 
a new vessel who scraps no vessel from 
the obligation to contribute to the scrap­
ping fund, which is a decision which must 
be preceded by consultation of the Mem­
ber States and the organisations repre­
senting inland waterways transport, the 
Commission is not required to give the 
owner details of the point of view 
expressed by the Member States or the 
organisations concerned. Their point of 
view carries only the weight of an opin­
ion and where the Commission takes a 
different approach that cannot cast doubt 
on the validity of its decision. 
II - 3922