Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATIONS - FORMAL REQUIREMENTS - SUBMISSIONS PUT FORWARD - BRIEF STATEMENT OF GROUNDS OF APPLICATION - CONCEPT

( PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ECSC, ARTICLE 22, RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, ARTICLE 38 )

2 . ECSC TREATY - GENERAL PROVISIONS - UNDERTAKING WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE TREATY - PRODUCTION - CONCEPT

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 80 )

3 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS - HIGH AUTHORITY - RETROACTIVE REVOCATION - CONDITIONS - REVIEW BY THE COURT

4 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS - DECISION OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY TAKEN WITH THE UNANIMOUS ASSENT OF THE COUNCIL - AMENDMENT - POWERS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY

5 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS - VALIDITY - CONDITIONS OF ESSENTIAL PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS - PROVISIONS RELATING THERETO - PROHIBITION ON THE EXTENSION OF THEIR APPLICATION

6 . COMMON FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS - EQUALIZATION OF FERROUS SCRAP - CONTRIBUTIONS - LIMITATION PERIOD - TIME RUNNING FROM DATE OF CLOSURE OF FINAL ACCOUNTS

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 53 )

7 . COMMON FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS - EQUALIZATION OF FERROUS SCRAP - UNIT OF ACCOUNT - FUNCTION

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 53 )

8 . COMMON FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS - EQUALIZATION OF FERROUS SCRAP - CONTRIBUTIONS - UNIT OF ACCOUNT - RATE OF EXCHANGE APPLICABLE DURING ACCOUNTING PERIODS

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 53 )

9 . COMMON FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS - EQUALIZATION OF FERROUS SCRAP - DISCRIMINATORY RULES - AMENDMENT - ABSENCE OF VESTED RIGHTS

Summary

1 . THE EXPRESSION ' EXPOSES SOMMAIRES DES MOYENS ' (' A BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE GROUNDS UPON WHICH THE APPLICATION IS BASED ') MEANS THAT THE APPLICATION MUST MAKE IT POSSIBLE TO IDENTIFY THE COMPLAINTS WHICH THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO RAISE AND THE ESSENCE OF THE ARGUMENTS INVOKED IN SUPPORT OF THEM .

CF . PARAGRAPH 3, SUMMARY IN JOINED CASES 19/60, 21/60, 2/61 AND 3/61, ( 1961 ) ECR 563 .

2 . THE SYSTEMATIC BUYING OF RAW MATERIALS MARKS THE COMMENCEMENT OF PRODUCTION WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 80 OF THE TREATY IF IT ENABLED THE BUYER TO START ACTUAL PRODUCTION, EVEN IF SUCH PRODUCTION WAS ON A TRIAL BASIS .

3 . THE HIGH AUTHORITY CAN REVOKE ILLEGAL DECISIONS, EVEN RETROACTIVELY, PROVIDED THAT IN CERTAIN EXCEPTIONAL CASES PROPER CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO THE PRINCIPLE OF LEGAL CERTAINTY . SUCH CONSIDERATION IS IN THE FIRST INSTANCE A MATTER FOR THE HIGH AUTHORITY; IT IS, HOWEVER, SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE COURT . THE REVOCATION IS INADMISSIBLE IF THE HIGH AUTHORITY MAKES A SUBSTANTIAL ERROR OF JUDGMENT IN CONSIDERING ANY POSITION ACQUIRED BY THE UNDERTAKING CONCERNED FOR WHICH IT COULD CLAIM PROTECTION, OR IF IT FAILS TO SHOW CARE AND ACCURACY IN ITS DEALINGS WITH THE UNDERTAKING .

CF . PARAGRAPH 10, SUMMARY, IN JOINED CASES 42 AND 49/59, ( 1961 ) ECR 107 .

4 . THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONCLUSION THAT THE DECISIONS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY TAKEN WITH THE UNANIMOUS ASSENT OF THE COUNCIL COULD ONLY BE AMENDED, EVEN IN THE CASE OF AMENDMENTS NOT AFFECTING THE BASIS OF SUCH DECISIONS, BY A NEW DECISION ALSO TAKEN WITH THE UNANIMOUS ASSENT OF THE COUNCIL .

5 . A PROVISION WHICH LAYS DOWN THE ESSENTIAL PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VALIDITY OF CERTAIN DECISIONS MUST BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED .

6 . IT IS OF THE NATURE OF THE EQUALIZATION SCHEME THAT THE LIMITATION PERIOD CAN ONLY RUN FROM THE DATE WHEN THE ACCOUNTS ARE FINALLY CLOSED .

CF . PARAGRAPH 4, SUMMARY, CASE 108/63, ( 1963 ) ECR 2-3 .

7 . IN THE FERROUS SCRAP EQUALIZATION SCHEME THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT IS NOT A CURRENCY DIFFERENT FROM NATIONAL CURRENCIES BUT IS MERELY AN ACCOUNTING DEVICE INTENDED TO FACILITATE THE FIXING OF A GENERAL EQUALIZATION PRICE AND THE UNIFORM AND EXPEDITIOUS CALCULATION OF EQUALIZATION PAYMENTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS .

8 . IT IS NECESSARY TO FIX THE CONTRIBUTIONS TO BE PAID BY THE UNDERTAKINGS TO THE FERROUS SCRAP EQUALIZATION SCHEME ON THE BASIS OF THE PARITY OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT IN FORCE DURING THE VARIOUS ACCOUNTING PERIODS .

9 . IN THE EQUALIZATION SCHEME, WHICH IS BASED ON A CLOSE INTERDEPENDENCE BETWEEN THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF EACH PARTICIPANT, IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO ALTER SITUATIONS CREATED BY RULES WHICH, IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE IN FORCE, WOULD CONFER UNJUSTIFIED BENEFIT ON CERTAIN UNDERTAKINGS COMPARED WITH OTHERS AND WOULD THEREFORE JEOPARDIZE THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SCHEME .