WRITTEN QUESTION E-3625/01 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Compensation for French ban on British beef.
Date: 2002-01-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, United Kingdom, beef, indemnification, infringement of EU law, sanction (EU)

18.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 172 E/99

When all of this is self evident, the Commission is puzzled by the uncharacteristically intemperate tone of
the Honourable Member’s question and feels that he may be acting on the basis of
inaccurate or
misleading information.

The Honourable Member claims that ‘the Commission hardly ever replies to questions submitted to it’ (by
MEP’s). The Commission would be obliged if the Honourable Member would either provide evidence to
support that claim or withdraw it forthwith.

As he will understand, the claim infers that the Commission consciously and repeatedly transgresses
against Article 197 (ex Article 140) of the Treaty, and that is demonstrably not the truth.

(2002/C 172 E/101)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3625/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 January 2002)

Subject: Compensation for French ban on British beef

Following the decision of the Court of Justice in Case C-1/00, will the Commission state what means of
redress and compensation are now available to British farmers whose livelihoods were affected by the
illegal French government decision?

Is the Commission satisfied with the procedures for compensation and redress in such cases, and will it
bring forward proposals to improve the present situation?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(10 April 2002)

In accordance with the case-law of the European Court of Justice established notably in Francovich & Boni-
faci v Italy (1), Brasserie du Pêcheur S.A. v Federal Republic of Germany (2) and The Queen v Secretary of
State for Transport ex parte: Factortame Ltd and others Community law incorporates a general principle to
the effect that a Member State is obliged to make good the damage to individuals caused by a breach of
Community law for which it was responsible.

In principle therefore British cattle farmers, suffering losses arising out the infringement of Community law
which the Court of Justice found had been committed in Case C-1/00, could initiate an action for damages
against France in the competent national court.

To be successful in such an action the claimants would have to satisfy the conditions referred to in the
relevant case-law.

The Commission is satisfied that the case-law referred to above does establish in a clear manner general
principles governing the responsibilities of Member States to individuals in relation to breaches of
Community law by the latter. The Commission has not therefore up to the present time presented any
proposals in relation to the matter. The Court has, however, recognised that in the absence of relevant
Community provisions for determining the extent of reparation it is for the domestic legal system of each
Member State to determine the criteria governing that aspect. The Court has, nevertheless, underlined that
those criteria must not be less favourable than those applying to similar cases based on domestic law and
must not be such as in practice to make it impossible or excessively difficult to obtain reparation.

(1)
(2)

Joined cases C-6/90 and 9/90 [1991] ECR I-5357.
Joined cases C-46/93 and C-48/93 [1996] ECR I-1029.