61963CO0106_EN
Parties
Grounds
Endorsements
Operative part
Parties
++++
IN JOINED CASES
106/63
ALFRED TOEPFER, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, WHOSE REGISTERED OFFICE IS AT HAMBURG, REPRESENTED BY AUGUST SCHULZ, ITS SPECIAL COMMERCIAL AGENT,
AND 107/63
GETREIDE-IMPORT GESELLSCHAFT, A LIMITED COMPANY, WHOSE REGISTERED OFFICE IS AT DUISBURG, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGERS WILHELM SPECHT AND WILHELM BREDER, ASSISTED BY WALTER HEMPEL OF THE HAMBURG BAR AND MR REDEKER OF THE BONN BAR ( FOR CASE 107/63 ONLY ), BOTH WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF GEORGES REUTER, AVOCAT-AVOUE, 7 AVENUE DE L ' ARSENAL,
APPLICANTS,
V
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY, REPRESENTED BY CLAUS-DIETER EHLERMANN, A MEMBER OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT OF THE EUROPEAN EXECUTIVES, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE OFFICES OF HENRI MANZANARES, SECRETARY OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT OF THE EUROPEAN EXECUTIVES, 2 PLACE DE METZ,
DEFENDANT,
Grounds
WHEREAS IN ITS APPLICATION LODGED ON 21 FEBRUARY 1964 THE DEFENDANT REQUESTED THE COURT TO DECIDE ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF APPLICATIONS 106/63 AND 107/63 AS A PRELIMINARY POINT, TO DISMISS THE PRINCIPAL APPLICATIONS AS INADMISSIBLE AND TO ORDER THE APPLICANTS TO BEAR THE COSTS OF THE PROCEEDINGS;
WHEREAS IN ITS STATEMENT IN REPLY LODGED ON 13 APRIL 1964 THE APPLICANTS REQUESTED THE COURT TO DISMISS THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE DEFENDANT FOR A PRELIMINARY DECISION ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE PRINCIPAL APPLICATIONS OR, ALTERNATIVELY, TO RESERVE ITS DECISION FOR THE FINAL JUDGMENT;
WHEREAS THE ORAL PROCEDURE CONCERNING THE OBJECTION OF INADMISSIBILITY TOOK PLACE ON 28 MAY 1964;
WHEREAS THE ADVOCATE-GENERAL, IN HIS OPINION DELIVERED ON 11 JUNE 1964, SUGGESTED TO THE COURT THAT IT SHOULD NOT GIVE JUDGMENT ON THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE DEFENDANT UNTIL AFTER THE PROCEDURE RELATING TO SUBSTANCE HAD BEEN COMPLETED;
WHEREAS AT THIS STAGE IN THE PROCEEDINGS IT SEEMS APPROPRIATE TO FOLLOW THIS SUGGESTION BECAUSE THE ELEMENTS OF THE PROBLEM OF THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE PRINCIPAL APPLICATIONS APPEAR TO BE INTERRELATED WITH THOSE FOR WHICH AN EVALUATION IS NECESSARY WHEN THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE IS EXAMINED;
Endorsements
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
HAVING REGARD TO ARTICLES 69 AND 91 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE;
UPON HEARING THE ADVOCATE-GENERAL;
Operative part
1 . THE DECISION ON THE OBJECTION RAISED BY THE DEFENDANT IS RESERVED FOR THE FINAL JUDGMENT;
2 . THE COSTS ARE RESERVED .