4.

The starting point for the interpretation of Article 6(2) of Regulation No 2267/84 must be the wording of that provision. Article 6(2) merely provides that the period of six months which normally applies in the case of advance payment of export refunds is extended to 12 months in the event of the simultaneous application of the two aid schemes. It does not in any event explicitly alter the starting point for the calculation of that 12-month period. Article 6(2) can be interpreted as envisaging a possibility of altering the starting point of the period only if the aim of the provision or other factors relevant to its interpretation show that it was intended to be possible to make full use of the two aid schemes for the 12-month period applying for aid for private storage. The following grounds are given for the new rules on the simultaneous application of the two aid schemes in the preamble to Regulation No 2267/84: ‘in view of the exceptional circumstances in the beef market and in order to encourage operators to make use of private storage it should be provided that, for a limited period, products under a private storage contract should be able at the same time to be placed under the system laid down in Article 5(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 565/80 ...; ... in view of the contractual storage periods it is necessary to derogate from Article 11(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 798/80 ... as to the period during which the products may stay under the system laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 565/80.’ The object of the new provisions is thus to encourage operators to make use of private storage. That is done by making it possible for operators also to obtain private storage aid for goods that are to be exported and for which export refunds are being paid in advance. At the same time, there is some coordination of the time limits in so far as the period of six months hitherto applying under the export aid scheme is extended in that particular case to 12 months. To interpret Article 6(2) as meaning that the 12-month period under the export aid scheme should expire before the 12-month period under the private storage aid scheme would run contrary to that object. The subsequent regulations on the simultaneous application of the two aid schemes which expressly ensured that from 1986 onwards it was possible for the two schemes to be fully applicable at the same time, can, in my view, also be regarded as signifying that such a result was envisaged by the provisions of Article 6(2). ( 11 ) The preambles to those regulations do not state any reasons for the changes made. In so far as the provisions in question are concerned, those preambles merely repeat the statement of reasons cited above from the 1984 regulation. It is moreover difficult to perceive what essential interest of the Community might be linked in the present circumstances to strict compliance with what under the normal rules is the starting point for the time limit under the export aid scheme. The provision in Article 7 of Regulation No 2267/84 envisaging the possibility of reducing the duration of private storage does not militate against the interpretation of Article 6(2) that I have suggested. That provision was not introduced in order to resolve the problem of different starting points for the 12-month periods. It was introduced so that the 12-month period for private storage would not prevent operators who had found export opportunities before the expiry of the 12-month period from carrying out the export at the time wished by the other contracting party. For those reasons I consider it justified to conclude on the basis of a purposive interpretation that the 12-month period under the export aid scheme expires at the same time as the period under the private storage aid scheme.