4.

Those proposals were discussed at the Fisheries Council of 21 December 1982 which, as a result of the opposition of the Danish Government, failed to reach an agreement. On the same day the Commission addressed to the Council a declaration ( 7 ) in the following terms: “The Commission recalls that the Member States not only have the right to adopt the necessary measures, subject to their approval by the Commission, but also have the duty to take these measures in the collective interest, this being a duty which the Commission can ask them to accept”. ... The Commission consequently calls upon all Member States : to notify it without delay of the national measures of conservation they plan to adopt; to confirm at the same time their intention to take the necessary action, at national level, to ensure that national measures of conservation planned, which the Commission approves, are complied with; the Commission will, in carrying out its responsibilities, and particulary when approving national conservation measures, act on the basis of the proposals that it has submitted to the Council; the Commission will ensure that the different national measures of conservation are as well coordinated as possible and requests the Member States' cooperation in this. The national measures must constitute a temporary system that is at once practicable, effective and nondiscriminatory.” On 22 December 1982 the United Kingdom adopted Order No 1849 which entered into force for one year as from 1 January 1983, and according to which, subject to certain conditions : “Fishing within such part of British fishery limits as lies within 12 miles from the baselines adjacent to the United Kingdom by any fishing boat registered in Denmark is hereby prohibited.” On the same day the United Kingdom expressed its disappointment at the failure of the negotiations which had taken place the previous day and submitted the measure that it had just adopted to the Commission for approval. It confirmed that it would naturally be prepared to amend or revoke that measure: “To avoid discrimination among fishermen from different Member States, when the Government of Denmark is able to give satisfactory assurances that this objective can be achieved in respect of Danish vessels.” By Decision 83/3/EEC of 5 January 1983 ( 8 ) the Commission, while reserving its decision on the substance of the measures, authorized the national measures which had been notified to it by certain Member States including the United Kingdom order adopted on 22 December 1982. That authorization was given “for reasons of public order to avoid conflicts arising” during the period when the measures in question were being examined “in the absence of any provision applying to fishing in Community waters” and was given “provisionally ... for a period to expire not later than 26 January 1983”. The Fisheries Council met on 25 January 1983. In the words of Mr Sack it produced “results beyond all expectations” ( 9 )In particular the Council adopted Regulation (EEC) No 170/83 which incorporated the substance of proposal submitted by the Commission on 11 June 1982 and, almost word for word, the provisions which are cited above. That then is the “Community context” of the case which is before the Court. Clearly it follows that the maintenance, for a further period of 10 years, of the derogatory rules based on Article 100 of the Act of Accession is an integral part of the common fisheries policy.