Order of the Court of 19 February 1960. - Kingdom of the Netherlands v High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community. - Case 25-59.



European Court reports

French edition Page 00787

Dutch edition Page 00811

German edition Page 00811

Italian edition Page 00757

English special edition Page 00386



Parties

Grounds

Operative part



Parties

++++

IN CASE 25/59

GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS APPLICANT,

V

HIGH AUTHORITY OF THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY DEFENDANT,

APPLICATION TO INTERVENE MADE ON 9 NOVEMBER 1959 BY

1 . COOPERATIEVE VERVOERSONDERNEMING INTERLIMBURG CA, VENLO, REPRESENTED BY ITS BOARD, COMPOSED OF F.G . VAN DER VEN, PRESIDENT, G.W . HELMES, VICE-PRESIDENT AND F . FAESSEN, MEMBER,

2 . REINHOLD COUMANS, PROPRIETOR OF R . COUMANS'TRANSPORTBEDRIJF, GELEEN,

3 . VENNOOTSCHAP ONDER FIRMA M . OVERDORP EN ZOON, VELSEN-IJMUIDEN O ., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGERS, MACHIEL OVERDORP AND LEENDERT OVERDORP,

4 . ROTTERDAMSCHE DROOGDOKMAATSCHAPPIJ NV, ROTTERDAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, KORNELIS VAN DER POLS,

5 . VERENIGING VAN METAAL-INDUSTRIEEN, THE HAGUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL PRESIDENT, DR J.C . HOOYKAAS, AND ITS SECRETARY, M . HEINSIUS, ALL WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF JACQUES LOESCH, 9, AVENUE DE LA LIBERTE,

AND ASSISTED BY G . DE GROOTH, BUITENGEWOON HOOGLERAAR AT THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF LEYDEN,

Grounds

THAT DECISION, WHICH IS BASED ON THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 88 OF THE ECSC TREATY :

RECORDS ( IN ARTICLE 1 THEREOF ) THAT THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES ARE FAILING TO FULFIL AN OBLIGATION UNDER THE TREATY SO LONG AS THEY DO NOT SUFFICIENTLY PUBLISH OR NOTIFY TO THE HIGH AUTHORITY THE SCALES, RATES AND ALL OTHER TARIFF RULES OF EVERY KIND APPLIED TO THE CARRIAGE BY ROAD OF COAL AND STEEL WITHIN THE COMMUNITY FOR HIRE OR REWARD;

INDICATES ( IN ARTICLES 2 AND 3 ) ALTERNATIVE MEASURES THE PROMULGATION OF WHICH, ACCOMPANIED BY APPROPRIATE SUPERVISION AND PENALTIES ( ARTICLE 5 ), IS REQUIRED OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES IN ORDER TO FULFIL THE OBLIGATION REFERRED TO;

SETS THE GOVERNMENTS 30 JUNE 1959 AS THE TIME-LIMIT FOR THE FULFILMENT OF THEIR OBLIGATION ( ARTICLE 6 ).

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS HAS BROUGHT PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 88 OF THE ECSC TREATY FOR ANNULMENT OF THE DECISION .

THE APPLICATION TO INTERVENE IS BROUGHT UNDER ARTICLE 34 OF THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY, WHICH ENABLES ANY NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSON WITHOUT ANY DISTINCTION WHATEVER TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AS AN INTERVENER SUBJECT TO THE TWO CONDITIONS THAT IT ESTABLISHES INTEREST IN THE RESULT OF ANY CASE SUBMITTED TO THE COURT AND THAT ITS SUBMISSION SHALL BE LIMITED TO SUPPORTING OR REQUESTING THE REJECTION OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF ONE OF THE PARTIES .

THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS ARE CONCERNED WITH THE ANNULMENT OF A COMPLEX DECISION .

THE CONTESTED DECISION IN THE MAIN ACTION, FIRSTLY, RECORDS THE FAILURE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS TO FULFIL AN OBLIGATION UNDER THE ECSC TREATY AND, SECONDLY, PRESCRIBES THE MEASURES NECESSARY FOR THE FULFILMENT OF THAT OBLIGATION .

IT IS NECESSARY TO ASCERTAIN PRECISELY WHICH PROVISION THE INTERVENERS HAVE AN INTEREST IN HAVING ANNULLED .

ALTHOUGH UNDERTAKINGS HAVING AN INTEREST CAN BE ALLOWED TO INTERVENE IN A DISPUTE ARISING UNDER ARTICLE 88, SUCH INTERVENTION CAN, HOWEVER, BE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING AN INTERPRETATION OF THE TREATY, TO THE EXCLUSION OF ANY CONSIDERATION OF DETERMINATION OF THE TIME-LIMIT WHICH THE HIGH AUTHORITY CAN SET THAT STATE FOR THE FULFILMENT OF ITS OBLIGATIONS OR THE DETAILED RULES FOR THE APPLICATION OF ANY RESTRICTIVE DECISION BY THE AUTHORITY AGAINST THAT STATE SINCE, IN THESE VARIOUS CASES, THE VERY NATURE OF THESE ACTS, WHICH TAKE PLACE AT THE LEVEL OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STATES, PUBLIC AUTHORITIES AND THE HIGH AUTHORITY AS THE COMMUNITY AGENCY, PRECLUDES THE INTERVENTION OF PRIVATE PERSONS; AND ARGUMENT ON THESE ISSUES MUST, THEREFORE, BE CONDUCTED EXCLUSIVELY BETWEEN THE MAIN PARTIES .

IN CONSEQUENCE, THE APPLICANTS' INTERVENTION IN THE PRESENT CASE CAN ONLY BE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUPPORTING THE CONCLUSION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS THAT DECISION NO 18/59 BE DECLARED NULL AND VOID IN THAT THE DECISION RECORDS THE FAILURE OF THAT GOVERNMENT TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE TREATY, IN PARTICULAR, BY FAILING TO PRESCRIBE REGULATIONS TO BE APPLIED TO CARRIAGE BY ROAD THE METHODS OF WHOSE APPLICATION ARE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLES 2, 3, 4 AND 5 OF THE SAID DECISION .

IN THIS CONTEXT, THE INTERVENER, AS CARRIERS BY ROAD AND AS CONSUMERS OF PRODUCTS CARRIED BY ROAD ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE DECISION AND THEIR INTEREST IN THE RESULT OF THE CASE IS ESTABLISHED .

ACCORDINGLY, THE APPLICATION TO INTERVENE SHOULD, WITHIN THE ABOVE-DEFINED LIMITS, BE ALLOWED .

Operative part

HEREBY :

1 . ALLOWS THE INTERVENTION OF

COOPERATIEVE VERVOERSONDERNEMING INTERLIMBURG GA VENLO; REINHOLD COUMANS, PROPRIETOR OF R . COUMANS' TRANSPORTBEDRIJF, GELEEN; VENNOOTSCHAP ONDER FIRMA M . OVERDORP EN ZOON, VELSEN-IJMUIDEN O .; ROTTERDAMSCHE DROOGDOKMAATSCHAPPIJ N.V ., ROTTERDAM, VERENIGING VAN METAAL-INDUSTRIEEN, THE HAGUE;

2 . LIMITS THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE INTERVENERS TO SUPPORTING THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS THAT DECISION NO 18/59 OF 18 FEBRUARY 1959, PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL OFFICIEL OF 7 MARCH 1959 BE DECLARED NULL AND VOID IN THAT THE DECISION RECORDS A FAILURE OF THAT GOVERNMENT IN ITS DUTY TO MAKE REGULATIONS TO BE APPLIED TO CARRIAGE BY ROAD AND IN THAT IT LAYS DOWN WAYS AND MEANS OF SO DOING .

3 . RESERVES THE COSTS .