61984CO0045_EN
Parties
Subject of the case
Grounds
Operative part
Parties
IN CASE 45/84 R
EUROPEAN INDEPENDENT STEELWORKS ASSOCIATION, AN ASSOCIATION OF UNDERTAKINGS FORMED UNDER THE LAW OF BELGIUM, WHOSE REGISTERED OFFICE IS AT 21 RUE DUCALE, BRUSSELS, REPRESENTED BY MICHEL WAELBROECK OF THE BRUSSELS BAR, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF ERNEST ARENDT, 34 RUE PHILIPPE-II,
APPLICANT,
V
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, 200 RUE DE LA LOI, 1049 BRUSSELS, REPRESENTED BY R . WAGENBAUR OF ITS LEGAL DEPARTMENT, ACTING AS AGENT, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE OFFICE OF MANFRED BESCHEL, JEAN MONNET BUILDING, KIRCHBERG,
DEFENDANT,
Subject of the case
APPLICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 39 OF THE ECSC TREATY FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF ARTICLE 15 B OF COMMISSION DECISION NO 234/84/ECSC OF 31 JANUARY 1984 ON THE EXTENSION OF THE SYSTEM OF MONITORING AND PRODUCTION QUOTAS FOR CERTAIN PRODUCTS OF UNDERTAKINGS IN THE STEEL INDUSTRY,
Grounds
1 ON 20 FEBRUARY 1984 THE APPLICANT BROUGHT AN ACTION IN WHICH IT REQUESTED THE COURT TO DECLARE VOID ARTICLE 15 B OF COMMISSION DECISION NO 234/84/ECSC OF 31 JANUARY 1984 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL, 1984, L 29 ) ON THE EXTENSION OF THE SYSTEM OF MONITORING AND PRODUCTION QUOTAS FOR CERTAIN PRODUCTS OF UNDERTAKINGS IN THE STEEL INDUSTRY .
2 AT THE SAME TIME THE APPLICANT MADE AN APPLICATION FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF THAT ARTICLE OF THE DECISION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 39 OF THE ECSC TREATY .
3 IN SUPPORT OF ITS APPLICATION THE APPLICANT ARGUES THAT ARTICLE 15 B OF THE DECISION COMPLETES THE IMPLEMENTATION BY THE COMMISSION OF THE POLICY OF FREEZING TRADITIONAL PATTERNS OF TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES, ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL ON 22 DECEMBER 1983 .
4 ARTICLE 15 B OF DECISION NO 234/84 PROVIDES THAT A MEMBER STATE MAY SUBMIT A COMPLAINT TO THE COMMISSION IF IT ESTABLISHES, WITH REGARD TO CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF STEEL PRODUCTS, THAT DELIVERIES OF PRODUCTS IN ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES HAVE BEEN ALTERED DURING A QUARTER TO A SIGNIFICANT EXTENT COMPARED WITH TRADITIONAL DELIVERIES . AFTER EXAMINING WHETHER THE COMPLAINT IS JUSTIFIED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURES LAID DOWN IN THE DECISION, THE COMMISSION MAY REQUEST THE UNDERTAKINGS IN QUESTION TO GIVE A COMMITMENT IN WRITING THAT, DURING THE FOLLOWING QUARTER, THEY WILL CORRECT THE IMBALANCE IN THEIR TRADITIONAL DELIVERIES . IF AN UNDERTAKINGS DOES NOT GIVE SUCH A COMMITMENT, OR IF THE COMMITMENT IS NOT HONOURED, THE COMMISSION MAY, PURSUANT TO THAT PROVISION, REDUCE THE PART OF THE UNDERTAKING ' S QUOTA WHICH MAY BE DELIVERED IN THE COMMON MARKET FOR THE FOLLOWING QUARTER BY A QUANTITY NOT EXCEEDING THAT WHICH CAUSED THE IMBALANCE IN TRADITIONAL DELIVERIES .
5 ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 39 OF THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY, ACTIONS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT DO NOT HAVE SUSPENSORY
EFFECT . THE COURT MAY, HOWEVER, IF IT CONSIDERS THAT CIRCUMSTANCES SO REQUIRE, ORDER THAT THE APPLICATION OF THE CONTESTED DECISION BE SUSPENDED . IT MAY ALSO PRESCRIBE ANY OTHER NECESSARY INTERIM MEASURES .
6 ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 83 ( 2 ) OF THE COURT ' S RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE COURT MAY SUSPEND THE OPERATION OF A MEASURE OR GRANT OTHER INTERIM MEASURES ONLY WHERE THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES GIVING RISE TO URGENCY AND FACTUAL AND LEGAL GROUNDS ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR SUCH MEASURES .
7 ARTICLE 15 B WAS ADOPTED ON THE BASIS, IN PARTICULAR, OF ARTICLE 58 OF THE TREATY . THAT ARTICLE PERMITS THE COMMISSION, IN THE EVENT OF A REDUCTION IN DEMAND AMOUNTING TO A MANIFEST CRISIS, TO ESTABLISH PRODUCTION QUOTAS . THOSE QUOTAS MUST BE DETERMINED ON AN EQUITABLE BASIS, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE PRINCIPLES SET OUT IN ARTICLES 2, 3 AND 4 OF THE ECSC TREATY, WHICH IN THE LAST-MENTIONED ARTICLE DECLARES QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON THE MOVEMENT OF STEEL PRODUCTS TO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMON MARKET FOR COAL AND STEEL .
8 SINCE THE PROCEDURE PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 15 B WILL BE USED AGAINST UNDERTAKINGS WHICH HAVE ALTERED THEIR DELIVERIES TO A SIGNIFICANT EXTENT COMPARED WITH TRADITIONAL DELIVERIES, IT CANNOT AT FIRST SIGHT BE EXCLUDED THAT ARTICLE 15 B MAY BE DIRECTED TOWARDS OBJECTIVES OTHER THAN THOSE PERMITTED BY ARTICLE 58 OF THE TREATY, INASMUCH AS IT CONDUCES TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES IN SOME STEEL PRODUCTS .
9 SIMPLY BY READING THE DECISION IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR A PRODUCER OR DEALER TO IDENTIFY THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH HE COULD CONTINUE TO EXPORT TO OTHER MEMBER STATES . FOR EXAMPLE, THE TERM ' ' TRADITIONAL DELIVERIES ' '
IS NOT DEFINED IN THE DECISION ; NOR DOES IT EXPLAIN WHAT IS MEANT BY ' ' ALTERATION OF DELIVERIES TO A SIGNIFICANT EXTENT ' ' .
10 THE DECISION CONTAINS NO LIMIT OR CONDITION ON THE USE OF THE POWER TO REDUCE QUOTAS IF A SIGNIFICANT ALTERATION IN TRADITIONAL DELIVERIES IS ESTABLISHED .
IN PARTICULAR, AN UNDERTAKING WHICH OBSERVES THE RULES ON PRICES, QUOTAS, COMPETITION AND STATE AID MAY FEAR SANCTIONS MERELY BECAUSE IT HAS INCREASED ITS DELIVERIES TO OTHER MEMBER STATES .
11 BECAUSE OF THE INFLUENCE WHICH IT IS LIKELY TO HAVE ON THE IMMEDIATE ACTIONS OF UNDERTAKINGS, THE SYSTEM SO ESTABLISHED IS SUCH THAT THE REQUIREMENT OF URGENCY WOULD NORMALLY BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN MET .
12 HOWEVER, DURING THE INTERLOCUTORY PROCEEDINGS THE COMMISSION HAS MADE A NUMBER OF STATEMENTS WITH REGARD TO THE WAY IN WHICH IT INTENDS TO APPLY THE PROVISION IN ISSUE . THE COURT HAS TAKEN NOTE OF THOSE STATEMENTS .
13 THE COMMISSION HAS UNDERTAKEN TO APPLY ARTICLE 15 B ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS :
( A ) FIRST, ARTICLE 15 B WILL NOT BE APPLIED SIMPLY BECAUSE AN ALTERATION IN TRADITIONAL DELIVERIES HAS BEEN OBSERVED ; IT WILL ONLY BE APPLIED WHERE THE CHANGE IN TRADITIONAL DELIVERIES MAY BE ASCRIBED TO THE ACTION OF UNDERTAKINGS ENGAGING IN PRACTICES WHICH ARE CONTRARY TO COMMUNITY LAW .
( B)SECONDLY, THE MERE FACT THAT THE UNDERTAKING CONCERNED IS IN RECEIPT OF AID AUTHORIZED BY THE COMMISSION MAY NOT GIVE RISE TO A QUOTA REDUCTION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 15 B .
( C)THIRDLY, IF THE COMMISSION ' S INQUIRY REVEALS INFRINGEMENTS OF OTHER PROVISIONS OF COMMUNITY LAW SUCH AS THOSE ON PRICES, QUOTAS, COMPETITION OR STATE AID, IT WILL FIRST OF ALL APPLY THE SANCTIONS PROVIDED FOR THOSE INFRINGEMENTS .
14 IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, PENDING A FULL EXAMINATION OF THE COMPATIBILITY OF ARTICLE 15 B WITH THE TREATY, IT MAY BE HELD THAT THOSE ASSURANCES REMOVE THE THREAT WITH WHICH THE UNDERTAKINGS WERE CONFRONTED AND WHICH COULD HAVE JUSTIFIED THE URGENT MEASURES REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT .
Operative part
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
THE COURT,
BY WAY OF INTERIM DECISION,
HEREBY ORDERS AS FOLLOWS :
1 . NOTE IS TAKEN OF THE UNDERTAKINGS GIVEN BY THE COMMISSION ;
2.THE APPLICATION IS DISMISSED ;
3.THE COSTS ARE RESERVED .