61978CJ0118_EN
Parties
Subject of the case
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part
Parties
IN CASE 118/78,
REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, QUEEN ' S BENCH DIVISION, COMMERCIAL COURT, LONDON, FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT BETWEEN
C . J . MEIJER B.V .
AND
THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE
THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOODS AND
THE COMMISSIONERS OF CUSTOMS AND EXCISE
Subject of the case
ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 60 ( 2 ) OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION,
Grounds
1BY AN ORDER OF 12 APRIL 1978, WHICH WAS RECEIVED AT THE COURT REGISTRY ON 19 MAY 1978, THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, QUEEN ' S BENCH DIVISION, COMMERCIAL COURT, REFERRED TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY A QUESTION RELATING TO THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 60 ( 2 ) OF THE ACT CONCERNING THE CONDITIONS OF ACCESSION AND THE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TREATIES ANNEXED TO THE TREATY OF 22 JANUARY 1972 CONCERNING THE ACCESSION OF THE KINGDOM OF DENMARK, IRELAND AND THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND TO THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY AND TO THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY ( HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ' ' THE ACT OF ACCESSION ' ' ).
2THE QUESTION WAS RAISED IN THE CONTEXT OF A DISPUTE BETWEEN A NETHERLANDS COMPANY WHICH EXPORTED POTATOES AND THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND IT RELATES TO THE REFUSAL OF THE LATTER AUTHORITIES TO PERMIT THE ENTRY OF A CONSIGNMENT OF POTATOES WHICH ARRIVED AT GREAT YARMOUTH ON 6 JANUARY 1978 .
3THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION SOUGHT A DECLARATION FROM THE NATIONAL COURT TO THE EFFECT THAT THE UNITED KINGDOM IS NOT SINCE 1 JANUARY 1978 ENTITLED TO PROHIBIT THE IMPORTATION OF POTATOES FROM MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY WHILST THE DEFENDANTS RELIED ON ARTICLE 60 ( 2 ) OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION ; THE NATIONAL COURT THEREFORE ASKED THE COURT OF JUSTICE TO GIVE A PRELIMINARY RULING ON THE FOLLOWING QUESTION :
' ' WHETHER IN THE CASE OF AN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT WHICH WAS NOT COVERED AT THE DATE OF ACCESSION BY A COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET AND IS STILL NOT SO COVERED ON 1 JANUARY 1978 ARTICLE 60 ( 2 ) OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION OR ANY OTHER PROVISIONS OF COMMUNITY LAW PERMITS THE RETENTION OF QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON IMPORTS IN RESPECT OF THAT PRODUCT AFTER 31 DECEMBER 1977 ( IF THEY FORMED PART OF A NATIONAL MARKET ORGANIZATION ON THE DATE OF ACCESSION ) TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO ENSURE THE MAINTENANCE OF THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND UNTIL THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET FOR THAT PRODUCT IS IMPLEMENTED?
' '
4THE MEASURES TO WHICH THE NATIONAL COURT REFERS HAVE FORMED THE SUBJECT OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER ARTICLE 169 OF THE EEC TREATY BROUGHT BY THE COMMISSION IN CASE 231/78 AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM FOR FAILURE TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS .
5IN SUBSTANCE THE LEGAL QUESTION EXAMINED IN THE CONTEXT OF CASE 231/78 IS IDENTICAL TO THAT RAISED BY THE QUESTION FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE .
6BY JUDGMENT DELIVERED THIS DAY THE COURT OF JUSTICE HAS RULED THAT, BY NOT REPEALING OR AMENDING BEFORE THE END OF 1977 THE PROVISIONS OF ITS NATIONAL LAW WHICH HAVE THE EFFECT OF RESTRICTING IMPORTS OF POTATOES, THE UNITED KINGDOM HAS FAILED TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE TREATY .
7IT IS SUFFICIENT THEREFORE TO REFER TO THE JUDGMENT IN CASE 231/78 THE TEXT OF WHICH IS ANNEXED TO THIS JUDGMENT ( SEE P . 1447 ).
8TAKING ACCOUNT OF THE GROUNDS REFERRED TO IN THAT JUDGMENT THE QUESTION PUT BY THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE MAY BE ANSWERED TO THE EFFECT THAT ARTICLE 60 ( 2 ) OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A SPECIAL PROVISION WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE RESERVATION SET OUT IN ARTICLE 9 ( 2 ) OF THAT ACT WITH THE RESULT THAT BY VIRTUE OF THE LATTER PROVISION ITS APPLICATION TERMINATED AT THE END OF 1977 .
Decision on costs
COSTS
9THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, WHICH HAVE SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT, ARE NOT RECOVERABLE .
10AS THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE, IN SO FAR AS THE PARTIES TO THE MAIN ACTION ARE CONCERNED, IN THE NATURE OF A STEP IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THE NATIONAL COURT, THE DECISION AS TO COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT .
Operative part
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
THE COURT,
IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO IT BY THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, QUEEN ' S BENCH DIVISION, COMMERCIAL COURT, BY ORDER OF 12 APRIL 1978, HEREBY RULES :
' ' ARTICLE 60 ( 2 ) OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A SPECIAL PROVISION WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE RESERVATION SET OUT IN ARTICLE 9 ( 2 ) OF THAT ACT WITH THE RESULT THAT BY VIRTUE OF THE LATTER PROVISION ITS APPLICATION TERMINATED AT THE END OF 1977 . ' '