***** COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 28.04.1995 
COM(95) 150 final 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
on compensation for certain producers of milk and milk products 
temporarily prevented from carrying on their trade ("SLOM" producers). 
Implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93 
COMMUNICATION FROM THF COMMISSION 
on compensation for certain producers of milk and milk products 
temporarily prevented from carrying on their trade ("SLOM" producers). 
Implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93 
1. On 22 July 1993, the Council adopted Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93 providing for an 
offer of compensation to certain producers of milk and milk products temporarily 
prevented from carrying on their trade (producers known as "SLOM producers"). 
Pursuant to Article 15 of that Regulation, the Commission adopted the detailed rules for 
its application through two Regulations: (EEC) No 2376/93 and (EEC) No 2648/93. 
The Council, in the fourth recital to its Regulation, noted that the sheer number of those 
potentially eligible made it impossible to take each case into account on an individual 
basis and necessitated a solution based on a flat-rate approach to be expressed in the 
form of an offer from the institutions to be accepted in full and final settlement or else 
rejected. 
The purpose of this communication is to report to the Council on the implementation 
of the Regulation concerned and to inform it of the action which the Commission 
intends to take on this dossier. 
2. In accordance with Article 16 of the Council Regulation, the national administrations 
responsible for administering the transactions were to pay the interested and eligible 
producers during the course of the 1993/94 budget year or before 15 October 1994. The 
assessment of the results was therefore made after that date and on the basis of 
information provided by the Member States. 
Thus, about 8 300 producers had received a "SLOM" reference quantity and were 
therefore eligible for the Council offer. About 6 870 producers accepted the offer and 
signed the receipt in full and final settlement, equivalent to more than 80% of the total. 
Six or seven hundred producers eligible for a "SLOM" reference quantity made no 
attempt to obtain compensation, either from the national administrations or the 
institutions, including Community courts. We can assume that no claim from those 
producers will now be introduced and that even if one were, its admissibility would be 
highly dubious. Therefore, the rate of settlement of the dossier is more than 90%. 
3. With regard to the remaining 10% or so, the following different situations can be 
distinguished: 
(D 
(a) Although there were a large number of withdrawals after the adoption of 
Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93 in respect of actions introduced prior to its 
adoption, some 350 dossiers are still pending before Community courts. These are: 
either actions based on Article 173 of the Treaty, their purpose being to 
contest the legality of Article 8 of the Regulation which only provides for 
compensation for the period which is not time-barred. The Court of First 
Instance has retained four dossiers as test-cases and all the other applicants 
have withdrawn; 
or - and this applies to almost all the cases - actions based on Article 215 
of the Treaty, having as their purpose to have the nominal amount of the 
compensation (and) or the interest provided for in the Regulation increased. 
It is necessary to wait for the result of these actions. 
(b) Some applications were rejected by national administrations because they did not 
meet the eligibility criteria in Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93. There are two 
choices here: either the producer will finally yield, or he has gone (or will go) to 
court, in which case, too, it will be necessary to await the result. 
(c) Certain producers were (or are) engaged in legal action against national authorities 
which refused to allocated them a reference quantity. There have been (and will 
be) rulings in favour of the producers, but these will be de facto after the end of 
the time limits in Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93 for introducing the application 
for compensation. 
(d) Producers were able to exceed the above time limits for various other reasons 
which often merit being taken into account. For example, the difficulty of 
compiling a complete dossier within the required time limit. Regulation (EEC) 
No 2187/93 set various time limits for the administration of the compensation 
action, but non-compliance with those dates, under certain circumstances and 
within certain limits, must not always result in the definitive loss of the right to 
compensation in respect of which the producer could in the end expect to receive 
a legal ruling in his favour. 
(e) Finally, it is not impossible that certain authorities will be confronted with cases 
of force majeure or with situations which, without being true cases of force 
majeure, nevertheless warrant being reassessed. 
In respect of the dossiers falling under the three categories (c), (d) and (e) above, the 
Commission proposes to ask the national administrations to send it the details after 
which, if it regards this action as justified, it will make direct transactions with the 
interested parties in the name of the Commission. The maximum basis for the 
compensation will be the financial parameters given in Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93, 
taking account of a reduction where circumstances warrant it. The Commission believes 
that, apart from possibly staving off a new wave of appeals to the Court of First 
Instance, this process of dealing with the rest of the cases is in the spirit of the Court 
of Justice rulings and of Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93. 
The Commission therefore asks the Council to acknowledge this communication and its 
conclusions. 
BUDGET HEADING: 
B1-209 APPROPRIATIONS: 
ECU 20 million 
TITLE: 
Communication from the Commission to the Council on compensation for certain producers of milk and milk products 
temporarily prevented from carrying on their trade. 
LEGAL BASIS: 
Article 215 of the Treaty 
AIMS: 
To notify progress as regards compensating the SLOM producers as provided for by Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93 and 
in particular to inform the Council of the Commission's intention to compensate some of those entitled by means of 
direct transactions. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: PERIOD OF 12 
MONTHS CURRENT 
FINANCIAL 
YEAR 
(95) FOLLOWING 
FINANCIAL 
YEAR 
(96) 
5.0. EXPENDITURE 
- CHARGED TO THE EC BUDGET 
(REFUNDS/INTERVENTION) + ECU 20 million + ECU 20 million 
5.1. REVENUE 
- OWN RESOURCES OF THE EC 
(LEVIES/CUSTOMS DUTIES) 
-NATIONAL 
5.0.1. ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE 
5.1.1. ESTIMATED REVENUE 1997 1998 •1999 2000 
5.2. METHOD OF CALCULATION: 
The cases referred to in paragraph 3(c) 
Number of cases: 160 
Average: ECU 50 000 
Cost: 160 x ECU 50 000 = ECU 8 million 
The cases referred to in paragraphs 3(d) and (c) 
Number of cases: 300 
Average: ECU 40 000 
Cost: 300 x ECU 40 000 = ECU 12 million 
TOTAL COST: ECU 8 million + ECU 12 million = ECU 20 million 
6.0. CAN THE PROJECT BE FINANCED FROM APPROPRIATIONS ENTERED IN THE RELEVANT 
CHAPTER OF THE CURRENT BUDGET? YES 
6.1. CAN THE PROJECT BE FINANCED BY TRANSFER BETWEEN CHAPTERS OF THE CURRENT 
BUDGET? \ 
6.2. 
6.3. WILL A SUPPLEMENTARY BUDGET BE NECESSARY? 
WILL FUTURE BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS BE NECESSARY? NO 
OBSERVATIONS The draft supplementary and amending budget No 1/95 takes the above into account. 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(95) 150 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 03 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-95-173-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-88152-6 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg