Communication from the Commission on compensation for certain producers of milk and milk products temporarily prevented from carrying on their trade ('SLOM producers') - Follow-up to the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2187/93
Date: 1998-05-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agricultural quota, dairy production, farmer, indemnification, non-marketing premium

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 07.05.1998 
COM(1998) 287  final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

on compensation for certain producers of milk and milk products temporarily 
prevented from carrying on their trade ("SLOM producers") - follow-up to the 
implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) N° 2187/93 

COMMUNICATION  FROM THE COMMISSION 

on compensation for certain producers of milk and milk products temporarily 
prevented from carrying on their trade ("SLOM  producers") - follow-up to the 
implementation of Council  Regulation (EEC) N° 2187/93 

1.  On  28  April  1995,  the  Commission  transmitted  a  communication  (COM(95)I50 
final)  to  the Council  on  the  implementation  of  Council  Regulation  (LLC)  N° 
2187/93  ("the  Regulation"),  which  was  considered  by  the  Special  Committee  on 
Agriculture at  its 989th  meeting on 6th June  1995.  In addition  to  reporting  on the 
execution  of  the  Regulation,  it  proposed  that  the  Commission  should  proceed  to 
settle, on the same financial  basis as the Regulation, the cases of certain categories of 
SLOM producers  who had beeen unable or who had failed  to take advantage of the 
provisions of the Regulation.  These  categories were : 

-  producers  who  obtained  a  SLOM  reference  quantity  as  a  result  of  legal  action 

against national authorities after the cut-off date in the Regulation; 

-  producers who failed to meet certain time-limits set out in the Regulation; 

-  cases offeree  majeure, or which should be treated as such. 

2.  Following  the  approval  given  to  this  course  of  action  at  the  above-mentioned 
meeting of the Special Committee on  Agriculture,  and the  necessary  information  on 
the  cases  having  subsequently  been  obtained  from 
the  Member  States,  the 
Commission  approved  a communication  (SEC(96)987/2  and  3) on  5 June  1996  to 
implement  the  procedure  to  compensate  these  producers,  which  was  referred  to  as 
the "clearing up" action.  Under the procedure, offers  of compensation  were made by 
the Member  States concerned  to  the  producers  identified  as  falling  into  the  specific 
categories, which could be accepted  within a time limit in full  and final settlement  of 
their claims as under the Regulation.  Almost  200 further  cases of SLOM  producers 
were settled under the "clearing up" action. 

3.  The communication to the Council of  1995 identified  a further  category of producers 
whose claims it  had  not  been  possible  to  settle  under  the  Regulation,  namely  those 
who contested the legality of Article 8 of the Regulation relating to the application  to 
the  producers'  claims of the  provisions  of  Article 43  of the  Statute  of  the Court  of 
Justice on the limitation  of actions,  in  its judgment  of  16 April  1997 in the case T-
20/94  (Hartmann  against  Council  and  Commission),  the  Court  of  First  Instance 
construed  Article  43  of the  Statute  in a  way  which  was entirely  in conformity  with 
the approach  followed  in Article 8 of the Regulation  As a conséquence the legality 
of  Article  8 of the  Regulation  must  be considered  as  having  been  confirmed  by this 
judgment.  Accordingly  a  settlement  of  the  llartmann-type  cases  could  now  be 

envisaged.  The  Commission  considers  to  be  Hartmann-type  cases  those  cases  in 
which 

- 

the applicant is a SLOM I or II produc«r and 

- 

- 

the applicant  had received  an o&er  of  compensation  pursuant  to  the  Regulation 
and 

the  applicant  refused  to  accept  the  offer  not  because  of  the  amount  of  annual 
compensation laid down by the regulation but for the sole reason that, pursuant to 
the  application  of  Article  8 of the  Regulation  concerning  the  time  bar  rules,  the 
period for which compensation was offered  had been reduced. 

It  is  estimated  that  there  are  about  55  producers  in  this  group  whose  cases  are 
pending before  the Court  of First  Instance.  It is proposed  that the direct  settlement 
of these claims should be carried  out following  a similar procedure  to that  under  the 
"clearing up" action referred  to in paragraph 2. 

4.  The settlement would  be based on the financial  parameters of the Regulation, but  the 
rate of interest  to  be paid  would  be adapted  in order  to  avoid  the consequence that 
this category of producers  should  benefit financially from having pursued  their cases 
before  the Court  of First  Instance.  The Commission  believes that  the  settlement  of 
these cases is appropriate given that  the only point  of  the Regulation  contested  was 
the  application  of  the  limitation  rules,  and  that  it  will  result  in  a  significant  further 
reduction in the remaining outstanding claims. 

It is foreseen that within the framework of this further  "clearing-up" action, it would 
also  be  possible  to  take  into  account  a  few  additional  cases  of  producers  who 
received  a  SLOM reference  quantity  after  the  cut  off  date  in the first "clearing  up" 
action, as well as some remaining "force  majeure"  type  cases.  There are about  10 
such cases to the knowledge of the Commission. 

5. 

Following the judgment  of the Court of First  Instance of 9 December  1997 in joined 
cases  T-195/94  and  T-202/94  (Quiller  and  Heusmann)  which  decided  that  the 
Community is, as a matter of principle, liable to compensate the damages suffered  by 
SLOM III producers, the Commission  will shortly  present  to  the Council  a proposal 
for  a regulation  providing  for  arrangements  for  the  settlement  of  the  claims  of this 
group of producers.  It is anticipated that in its proposal the Commission will provide 
for  a general  legal  base  permitting  the  settlement  of  the  claims  of  producers  which 
fall  outside  the  strict  conditions  of  the  arrangements  adopted,  but  whose 
circumstances satisfy  the conditions for non-contractual  liability of the Community as 
laid  down  in the judgments  of the Court  of Justice  and  the  Court  of  First  Instance 
This would  provide  a basis for  the  settlement  of the  categories  of cases covered  by 
the first "clearing up" action and that which is now foreseen 

6.  The Commission  therefore  asks the Council  to acknowledge  this communication  and 

its conclusions. 

FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 

(fiche/98/007.doc)l 

DATE  :5/05/98 

BUDGET  HEADING  : 

Bl-2090 

APPROPRIATIONS:  p.m. 

TITLE : 
Communication  from  the Commission  to the Council  on compensation  for  certain  producers  of milk  and  milk  products  temporarily 
prevented  from  carrying on their trade ("SLOM  producers")  follow-up  to the  implementation  of Council  Regulation  (EEC1) n" 
2187/93 

LEGAL  BASIS  :  Article 215 of the Treaty 

4. 

AIMS: 
To notify  progress as regards the settlement  of outstanding claims of SLOM  producers  and  in particular  to inform  the Council of 
the Commission's  intention  to compensate  certain  further  categories of those entitled  by means of direct  transactions. 

PERIOD OF 
12 MONTHS 

CURRENT 
FINANCIAL  YEAR 
(190S) 

FOLLOWING 
FINANCIAL  YEAR 
(1999) 

ECU  2,4  million 

i  ECU  :.  I million 

p.m. 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

•TNANCIAL  IMPLICATIONS 

5.0 

5.1 

5.0.1 
5.1.1 

5.2 

EXPENDITURE 
- CI IARGED TO THE  EC  BUDGE 
(REFUNDS/INTERVENTION) 

-  NATIONAL  AUTHORITIES 
-  OTHER 

REVENUE 
- OWN  RESOURCES  OF THE  EC 
(LEVIES/CUSTOMS  DUTIES) 
-  NATIONAL 

ESTIMATED  EXPENDITURE 
ESTIMATED  REVENUE 

METHOD  OF CALCULATION  : 
The cases referred  to  in paragraph  3 
Number  of cases  : 
Average  : 
Cost: 
55 x ECU 24.000 - 
The cases referred  to  in paragraph  4 
Estimation  : 

55 
ECU  24.000 
ECU  (A)  1,3 million 

ECU  (A) 0,7  million 

TOTAL  COST  .ECU  1,3 million  I 0,7 million  : ECU  2 million  x  1,191 (DR) 

2,4  Mio ECU  (B) 

6.0 

CAN  THE  PROJECT  BE  FINANCED  FROM  APPROPRIATIONS  ENTERED  IN  THE 
RELEVANT CHAPTER  OF THE CURRENT  BUDGET ? 

YES 

CAN  11 IE PROJECT  BE FINANCED  BY TRANSFER  BETWEEN  CI IAPTERS OF TI IE CURRENT  BUDGET  ? 

o..! 

WILL  A SUPPLEMENTARY  BUDGET  BE  NECESSARY'' 

WILL  II! I URE  BUDGET  APPROPRIA ÏÏONS  BE  NECESSARY 

NO 

OBSERVATIONS 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(98) 287 final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

03  15  10 

Catalogue  number  :  CB-CO-<)8-30(vKN-C 

ISBN  92-78-35999-8 

Office  for Official  Publications of the European  Communities 

L-2985  Luxembourg