Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:1998:88
Date: 1998-03-05
Language of the case: Italian
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Competition;Agreements, decisions and concerted practices;Transport;Dominant position
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Italy

Summary of the Judgmen t 
1. Competition — Community rules — Obligations of the Member States — Setting of road-
haulage tariffs by the State — Compatibility — Conditions — Concepts of general interest 
and public interest 
(EC Treaty, Arts 3(g), 5, 85, 86 and 90) 
2. Competition — Community rules — Obligations of the Member States — Setting of road-
haulage tariffs by the State — Collective agreements allowing derogation from compulsory 
tariffs which are enforceable against operators who have not signed them — Restriction of 
competition — Excluded 
(EC Treaty, Art. 85) 
I - 5955 
SUMMARY — CASE C-38/97 
1. Articles 3(f) and (g), 5, 85, 86 and 90 of 
the Treaty do not preclude legislation of a 
Member State which provides for road-
haulage tariffs to be approved and brought 
into force by the State on the basis of pro­
posals of a central committee the majority 
of whose members are representatives of 
the economic agents concerned and which 
extends the mandatory tariffs applicable in 
the field of contracts for the carriage of 
goods by road to other types of contracts, 
relating to different services, such as, in 
particular, contracts under invitations to 
tender and contracts for hire, provided 
that the tariffs are fixed with due regard 
for the public-interest criteria defined by 
law and the public authorities do not hand 
over their prerogatives to private eco­
nomic agents in taking into account, before 
the approval of proposals, of the observa­
tions of other public and private bodies 
and even by fixing tariffs ex officio. 
In that context, it is for the Member States 
to determine the specific criteria of public 
interest, in the sense that the interests of 
the collectivity have to prevail over private 
interests, which best allow the Commu­
nity rules of competition to be observed. 
It is for the national court to determine, in 
the exercise of its jurisdiction, that in prac­
tice tariffs are fixed subject to observance 
of the public-interest criteria defined by 
the law and that the public authorities are 
not handing over their prerogatives to pri­
vate economic agents. 
2. Under a national system of mandatory 
road-haulage tariffs, the fact that collective 
agreements can be concluded allowing cer­
tain derogations from them does not have 
the effect of restricting competition within 
the meaning of Article 85 of the Treaty, 
even if such agreements are enforceable, 
under national law, against operators who 
have not signed them. 
I - 5956