Judgment of the Court of 2 July 1964. - Société Rhenania and others v Commission of the European Economic Community. - Case 103/63.



European Court reports

French edition Page 00839

Dutch edition Page 00877

German edition Page 00915

Italian edition Page 00833

English special edition Page 00425

Danish special edition Page 00513

Greek special edition Page 01151

Portuguese special edition Page 00505



Parties

Subject of the case

Grounds

Decision on costs

Operative part



Parties

++++

IN CASE 103/63

RHENANIA, SCHIFFAHRTS - UND SPEDITIONS - GESELLSCHAFT MBH, MANNHEIM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGERS, MESSRS FREIMUTH, SCHARLACH AND HANS VOIGHT,

RHENUS, GESELLSCHAFT FUR SCHIFFAHRT, SPEDITION UND LAGEREI MBH, FRANKFURT ON MAIN, HAFENSTRASSE 1, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGERS, MESSRS WILHELM KIRCHGASSER AND LUDWIG ROSSING,

WESTFALISCHE TRANSPORT-AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, DORTMUND, MALINCKRODT-STRASSE 320, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTORS, MESSRS FRIEDRICH G MULLER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, AND WOLFGANG DIX, ASSISTED BY MESSRS . DRES, MODEST, HEEMAN, MENSEN, GUNDISCH, BINDER AND BRANDEL, ADVOCATES OF HAMBURG 39, SIERICHSTRASSE 78, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE OFFICE OF FELICIEN JANSEN, HUISSIER DE JUSTICE, 21 RUE DE ALDRINGER, APPLICANTS,

V

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY, REPRESENTED BY CLAUS-DIETER EHLERMANN, MEMBER OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT OF THE EUROPEAN EXECUTIVES, ACTING AS AGENT, 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,

Subject of the case

APPLICATION CONCERNING THE POSSIBLE DEFAULT OF THE COMMISSION IN FAILING TO PUT INTO OPERATION AS RESPECTS THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 169 OF THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY CONCERNING THE FIXING OF DERIVED INTERVENTION PRICES OF CEREALS,

Grounds

DURING THE ORAL PROCEDURE THE APPLICANTS FIRST OF ALL EXPLAINED THAT THE LETTER WHICH THE DEFENDANT SENT TO THEM ON 25 NOVEMBER 1963 HAD SATISFIED THEIR FIRST PRINCIPAL REQUEST, WHICH WAS THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD CONSIDER THEIR LETTER OF 31 JULY 1963 AND INFORM THEM OF THE RESULT OF SUCH CONSIDERATION .

THE APPLICANTS WERE THUS IN FACT INFORMED ON 25 NOVEMBER 1963 THAT THE COMMISSION'S DEPARTMENTS HAD BEGUN TO CONSIDER THE QUESTIONS RAISED ON 31 JULY 1963 AND THAT THE RESULT OF SUCH CONSIDERATION WOULD BE SENT TO THEM LATER .

IN THE SECOND PLACE, DURING THE ORAL PROCEDURE AND AFTER THE DEFENDANT'S ORAL ADDRESS, THE APPLICANTS STATED THAT THEY HAD ACHIEVED THE OBJECT OF THEIR SECOND PRINCIPAL REQUEST, PROCEEDINGS HAVING BEEN INSTITUTED UNDER ARTICLE 169 BY THE COMMISSION AGAINST THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY IN RESPECT OF THE MATTER IN DISPUTE .

IT THUS FOLLOWS FROM THE FOREGOING THAT THE PRINCIPAL REQUESTS OF THE APPLICANTS HAVE NO FURTHER PURPOSE AND CONSEQUENTLY THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO ADJUDICATE UPON THEM .

Decision on costs

IN ADDITION TO THE PRINCIPAL REQUESTS, THE APPLICATION ASKS THAT THE DEFENDANTS BE ORDERED TO BEAR THE COSTS . THE APPLICANTS STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT WITHDRAW THEIR APPLICATION IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE COURT TO DECIDE UPON THIS QUESTION .

IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WORDING OF ARTICLE 69 ( 5 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THE COSTS SHALL BE IN THE DISCRETION OF THE COURT WHERE A CASE DOES NOT PROCEED TO JUDGMENT .

WITHOUT HAVING TO CONSIDER TO WHAT EXTENT THE APPLICATION WAS ADMISSIBLE AND WELL FOUNDED, THE COURT FINDS, GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE COURSE TAKEN BY THE PROCEEDINGS, SUFFICIENT GROUND TO DECIDE THAT THE PARTIES MUST BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS .

Operative part

THE COURT

HEREBY RULES :

1 . THE ISSUES IN THE CASE HAVE BEEN DISPOSED OF;

2 . THE PARTIES SHALL BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS .