61970CJ0034_EN
Parties
Subject of the case
Grounds
Decision on costs
Endorsements
Operative part
Parties
IN CASE 34/70
REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE FRENCH CONSEIL D ' ETAT FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT BETWEEN
( 1 ) SYNDICAT NATIONAL DU COMMERCE EXTERIEUR DES CEREALES, PARIS,
( 2 ) ANDRE AND CIE ( COMPTOIR COMMERCIAL ), PARIS,
( 3 ) SOCIETE FRANCAISE BUNGE, PARIS,
( 4 ) COMPAGNIE ALGERIENNE DE MEUNERIE, PARIS,
( 5 ) COMPAGNIE CONTINENTALE ( FRANCE ), PARIS,
( 6 ) SOCIETE J . A . GOLDSCHMIDT AND CIE, PARIS,
( 7 ) ETABLISSEMENTS G . AND P . LEVY, PARIS,
( 8 ) LES FILS DE FELIX SAIER, PARIS,
AND
OFFICE NATIONAL INTERPROFESSIONNEL DES CEREALES AND MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE,
Subject of the case
ON THE INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF REGULATIONS NO 1028/68 OF THE COMMISSION OF 19 JULY 1968 FIXING THE PROCEDURE AND CONDITIONS FOR THE TAKING OVER OF CEREALS BY INTERVENTION AGENCIES FOR THE 1968/1969 MARKETING YEAR ( OJ 1968, L 176 ),
Grounds
1 BY ORDER DATED 26 JUNE 1970 LODGED AT THE COURT ON 16 JULY 1970, THE FRENCH CONSEIL D' ETAT HAS RAISED UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY THE QUESTION " WHETHER BY USE OF THE WORDS " EVERY HOLDER " IN ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1028/68 OF THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ALL CONDITIONS FOR THE TAKING OVER OF CEREALS RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE HOLDER OR HIS ENTITLEMENT TO AVAIL HIMSELF OF THE INTERVENTION MACHINERY, HAVING REGARD TO THE PECULIARITIES OF THE CEREAL MARKET IN THE MEMBER STATE OF THE HOLDER, ARE OR ARE NOT EXCLUDED FROM THE SCOPE OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY MEASURES PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 5 OF THE SAID REGULATION " .
2 UNDER ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 1028/68 : " EVERY HOLDER OF HOMOGENEOUS LOTS OF A MINIMUM OF 50 TONNES OF COMMON WHEAT, RYE, BARLEY AND MAIZE AND OF 10 TONNES OF DURUM WHEAT HARVESTED IN THE COMMUNITY SHALL BE ENTITLED TO OFFER SUCH CEREALS TO THE INTERVENTION AGENCY ".
3 UNDER ARTICLE 5 OF THE SAME REGULATION " INTERVENTION AGENCIES SHALL LAY DOWN AS NECESSARY SUPPLEMENTARY PROCEDURES AND CONDITIONS FOR THE TAKING OVER OF CEREALS AS MAY BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS REGULATION TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS EXISTING IN THE MEMBER STATE TO WHICH THEY BELONG ".
4 IT APPEARS FROM THESE PROVISIONS THAT THE PRINCIPLE CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 1 ENABLING " EVERY HOLDER " TO OFFER CEREALS TO THE INTERVENTION AGENCY IS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS FOR TAKING OVER LAID DOWN BY THE COMMUNITY RULES TO WHICH MAY BE ADDED SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS FOR TAKING OVER LAID DOWN BY THE MEMBER STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 5 OF THE SAID REGULATION .
5 THE SAID ARTICLE 5 THUS ALLOWS FOR NATIONAL MEASURES NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALTERING THE COMMUNITY PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1 BUT ONLY TO PROVIDE FOR SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS FOR TAKING OVER AS MAY BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF REGULATION NO 1028/68 .
6 IT FOLLOWS FROM THE FIFTH RECITAL IN THE PREAMBLE TO REGULATION NO 120/67 THAT THE OBJECTIVE OF THE INTERVENTION MACHINERY ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE CEREAL MARKET IS TO STABILIZE MARKETS AND TO ENSURE A FAIR STANDARD OF LIVING FOR THE AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY CONCERNED .
7 WHILST INCLUDING MEASURES OF PRICE SUPPORT, THE INTERVENTION MACHINERY DOES NOT AIM TO DEROGATE FROM THE NORMAL CONDITIONS OF THE MARKET BEYOND WHAT IS STRICTLY NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE ITS OBJECTIVE .
8 IT APPEARS BOTH FROM THE GENERAL OBJECTIVES AND THOSE OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN CEREALS THAT THE INTERVENTION MACHINERY REQUIRES THE WIDEST POSSIBLE ACCESS FOR ALL THOSE CONCERNED IN THE FUNCTIONING OF THIS MARKET .
9 ALTHOUGH THE SEVENTH RECITAL IN THE PREAMBLE TO REGULATION NO 120/67 IMPLIES THAT THE OFFER AND TAKING OVER OF CEREALS BY INTERVENTION AGENCIES BE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS, IT APPEARS FROM REGULATION NO 1028/68 THAT THESE CONDITIONS RELATE TO THE QUALITY AND MINIMUM QUANTITIES OF CEREALS WHICH MAY PRACTICABLY BE OFFERED AND THE ONLY REASON FOR THEM IS THE NECESSITY FOR SIMPLIFYING THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SYSTEM AND NOT THE INTENTION OF LIMITING ACCESS TO INTERVENTION TO SPECIFIC CLASSES OF HOLDERS OR OF ALLOWING NATIONAL LAW THE OPPORTUNITY OF ALTERING THE CONCEPT OF " HOLDER " FROM ONE STATE TO ANOTHER .
10 IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ADMIT IN THE ABSENCE OF A CLEARLY EXPRESSED INTENTION ON THE PART OF THE DRAFTSMEN OF THE REGULATION THAT IN THE FINAL STAGE OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE CEREAL MARKET EACH STATE MAY GIVE ITS OWN MEANING TO THE GENERALITY OF THE EXPRESSION " EVERY HOLDER ".
11 THE GENERALITY OF WORDING IS DUE IN PARTICULAR TO THE FACT THAT THE EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN CLASSES OF HOLDERS WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF BURDENING THE MARKET WITH THE QUANTITIES EXCLUDED FROM INTERVENTION ALTHOUGH THEY ORIGINATED FROM THE NATIONAL PRODUCTION IN FAVOUR OF WHICH HOWEVER THE RULES WERE ESTABLISHED .
12 MOREOVER, TO ATTAIN THE OBJECTIVES SET, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS MACHINERY MUST BE SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH ARE AS UNIFORM AS POSSIBLE IN ORDER TO AVOID OBSTACLES TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF CEREALS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY .
13 ALTHOUGH IN ORDER TO ALLOW APPROPRIATE ADAPTATION OF THE MARKET TO THE REGIONALIZATION OF PRICES, THE INTERVENTION AGENCIES MAY LAY DOWN, IN PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, INTERVENTION MEASURES ADAPTED TO THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, REGULATION NO 120/67 ON WHICH REGULATION NO 1028/68 IS BASED, SHOWS IN THE SEVENTH RECITAL IN ITS PREAMBLE THAT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE REQUIRED UNIFORMITY OF INTERVENTION SYSTEMS, THOSE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD BE ASSESSED AND THE APPROPRIATE MEASURES DETERMINED AT COMMUNITY LEVEL .
14 ACCORDING TO THE FOURTH RECITAL IN THE PREAMBLE TO REGULATION NO 1028/68 IT IS IN PARTICULAR WITH REGARD TO THE CONDITIONS OF OFFER TO THE INTERVENTION AGENCIES AND THE TAKING OVER OF CEREALS BY THEM THAT THE PRINCIPLE OF UNIFORMITY IS CONSIDERED INDISPENSABLE FOR THE INTERVENTION SYSTEMS IN ORDER TO AVOID ANY DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN THOSE CONCERNED WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE COMMON MARKET .
15 IN ALLOWING MEMBER STATES THE OPPORTUNITY OF LAYING DOWN SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS FOR TAKING OVER ADAPTED TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING IN THE NATIONAL MARKET, REGULATION NO 1028/68 DEFINES THE LIMITS WITHIN WHICH THESE NATIONAL RULES MAY BE DRAWN UP .
16 UNDER THE EXPRESS TERMS OF THE THIRD AND FOURTH RECITALS IN THE PREAMBLE TO THIS REGULATION, NATIONAL RULES ARE PROVIDED FOR, NOT FOR LIMITING THE SCOPE OF ARTICLE 1 OF THE REGULATION, BUT FOR ALLOWING THE STATE TO TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE CONDITIONS AND THE CUSTOMS OF THE WHOLESALE TRADE WHICH OBTAIN IN ITS COUNTRY OR TO ADAPT THE INTERVENTION SYSTEM TO THE CLIMATIC CONDITIONS OF THE NATIONAL MARKET .
17 NATIONAL RULES WHICH AIM BY MEANS OF ARTICLE 5 TO DEFINE WITHIN THE NATIONAL SYSTEM THE CONCEPT OF " HOLDER " HAVING ACCESS TO THE INTERVENTION AGENCY, THE SCOPE OF WHICH MUST BE DETERMINED BY THE COMMUNITY WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 1, WOULD EXCEED THE ABOVE CONDITIONS DEFINED BY REGULATION NO 1028/68 AND CONFLICT WITH THE PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE INTERVENTION MACHINERY .
18 THE USE OF THE WORDS " EVERY HOLDER " IN ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1028/68 OF THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES THUS EXCLUDES FROM THE SCOPE OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS FOR TAKING OVER PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 5 OF THE SAID REGULATION ANY CONDITION RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE HOLDER OR HIS ENTITLEMENT TO AVAIL HIMSELF OF THE INTERVENTION MACHINERY .
Decision on costs
19 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, WHICH HAS SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT, ARE NOT RECOVERABLE, AND AS 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 ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT .
Endorsements
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
UPON READING THE PLEADINGS;
UPON HEARING THE REPORT OF THE JUDGE-RAPPORTEUR;
UPON HEARING THE OBSERVATIONS OF SYNACOMEX JOINTLY WITH THE OTHER PLAINTIFFS IN THE MAIN ACTION, ONIC AND THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES; UPON HEARING THE OPINION OF THE ADVOCATE-GENERAL;
HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY ARTICLES 39, 40 AND 177;
HAVING REGARD TO REGULATION NO 120/67/EEC OF THE COUNCIL OF 13 JUNE 1967 AND REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1028/68 OF THE COMMISSION OF 19 JULY 1968;
HAVING REGARD TO THE PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EEC, ESPECIALLY ARTICLE 20;
HAVING REGARD TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES;
Operative part
THE COURT
IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO IT BY THE FRENCH CONSEIL D' ETAT BY ORDER OF THAT COURT OF 26 JUNE 1970, HEREBY RULES :
THE USE OF THE WORDS " EVERY HOLDER " IN ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1028/68 OF THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES EXCLUDES FROM THE SCOPE OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS FOR TAKING OVER PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 5 OF THE SAID REGULATION ANY CONDITION RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE HOLDER OR HIS ENTITLEMENT TO AVAIL HIMSELF OF THE INTERVENTION MACHINERY .