PROTECTIVE MEASURES SEEKS, FIRST, SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE SAID DECISION AND, SECONDLY, ITS ANNULMENT .
THE APPLICATION TO SUSPEND THE OPERATION OF THE CONTESTED DECISION
ARTICLE 3 OF THE ABOVE DECISION AUTHORIZES THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC FOR A PERIOD OF TEN MONTHS TO LEVY CERTAIN CUSTOMS DUTIES, THE AMOUNT OF WHICH IT FIXES FOR ITSELF, ON THE IMPORT OF VARIOUS WOVEN SILK FABRICS .
THE APPLICATION TO SUSPEND THE OPERATION OF THIS PROVISION IS BASED UPON THE IRREPARABLE NATURE OF THE DAMAGE CAUSED BY THIS PROVISION TO ITALIAN SERICULTURE AND THE ITALIAN SILK INDUSTRY .
ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 83(3 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE AN APPLICATION TO SUSPEND THE OPERATION OF ANY MEASURE ADOPTED BY AN INSTITUTION ' SHALL BE MADE BY A SEPARATE DOCUMENT '.
THIS HAS NOT BEEN DONE IN THE PRESENT CASE .
BY TERMS OF A SINGLE DOCUMENT THE COURT IS REQUESTED ' AFTER MAKING AN ORDER TO SUSPEND THE OPERATION OF THE DECISION IN QUESTION ' TO ' ANNUL ARTICLE 3 THEREOF '.
SINCE THIS REQUEST WAS NOT SUBMITTED IN A SEPARATE DOCUMENT BUT IN THE APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT ITSELF, INTO WHICH IT WAS INCORPORATED AND FROM WHICH IT CANNOT BE SEPARATED, IT MUST BE DISMISSED AS INADMISSIBLE FOR FAILURE TO OBSERVE THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 83(3 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE .
MOREOVER, THE APPLICATION TO SUSPEND THE OPERATION OF THE DECISION HAS BECOME POINTLESS BY VIRTUE OF THE PRESENT JUDGMENT ON THE MAIN ISSUE .
P.373
THE APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT
( A ) INFRINGEMENT OF AN ESSENTIAL PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT .
( A ) INFRINGEMENT OF AN ESSENTIAL PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT
IT IS COMPLAINED THAT THE REASONS STATED FOR THE DECISION FIXING THE PROTECTIVE MEASURES ONLY TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE COST OF THE RAW MATERIAL AND NOT THE OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED IN THE COST PRICE OF THE FABRIC, IN PARTICULAR THE OVERHEADS .
IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE DECISION, HOWEVER, THAT THE REASONS GIVEN INCLUDE AMPLE EXPLANATIONS FOR THE LIMITATION ON THE CUSTOMS DUTIES AUTHORIZED IN PARTICULAR AS REGARDS THE RATIONALIZATION OF THE PRODUCTION OF RAW SILK AND THE PRICES BOTH OF THE LATTER AND OF WOVEN SILK FABRICS .
THESE REASONS APPEAR SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY THE OPERATIVE PART OF THE DECISION .
ALTHOUGH THE COMMISSION IS CRITICIZED FOR NOT HAVING CONSIDERED OTHER FACTORS WHICH MIGHT HAVE LED IT TO TAKE A DIFFERENT DECISION, THIS COMPLAINT IS NOT ONE WHICH COULD APPLY TO THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION BUT RATHER CONCERNS A CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DECISION .
THIS SUBMISSION MUST THEREFORE BE DISMISSED .
( B ) INFRINGEMENT OF THE TREATY
THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC HAVING, BY VIRTUE OF PROTOCOL NO VIII ANNEXED TO THE AGREEMENT OF 2 MARCH 1960, REQUESTED AUTHORIZATION TO TAKE PROTECTIVE MEASURES WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 226, THE COMMISSION, BY THE TERMS OF THE CONTESTED DECISION, FIXED VARIOUS CUSTOMS DUTIES ON WOVEN SILK FABRICS TO BE IMPOSED BY THE APPLICANT, BUT CONSIDERED BY THAT PARTY TO BE, FIRST, AN INFRINGEMENT