JUDGING THE SOUNDNESS OF THAT CRITERION, IS OF THE OPINION THAT MORE SPECIFIC AND FULLER REASONS SHOULD BE FORTHCOMING BEFORE IT IS APPLIED .
AS TO ( C ) EVEN IF IT SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED THAT IT IS NECESSARY TO LIMIT DIRECT DELIVERIES FROM THE MINES TO TRADERS HOLDING A WIDE RANGE OF CATEGORIES AND TYPES, THE QUESTION ARISES WHY THE PROVISION IN ARTICLE 6 ( 3 ), AS AMENDED, OF DECISION NO 17/59, WAS NOT CONSIDERED SUFFICIENT IN THAT RESPECT, BECAUSE THAT PROVISION, WHICH IS NOT CONTESTED IN THE PRESENT APPLICATIONS, ALLOWS THE AGENCIES TO REFUSE TO SELL TO TRADERS WHO CANNOT SHOW THAT THEY HOLD SUCH A RANGE OF CATEGORIES AND TYPES, AND THIS IS REGARDLESS OF ANY QUALITATIVE CRITERION .
THE STATEMENT OF REASONS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY WORTHWHILE INFORMATION ON THIS POINT .
IT RESULTS FROM THE FOREGOING THAT THE MAINTENANCE OF THE CRITERION OF 30 000 ( 20 000 ) METRIC TONS IS NOT SUPPORTED BY SUFFICIENT REASONS AT LAW .
AS TO ( D ) AS THE COURT HAS FOUND ABOVE THAT INSUFFICIENT REASONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN FOR THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE CRITERION OF " COMMUNITY COAL ", THE AFOREMENTIONED INSUFFICIENT REASONS DO NOT RENDER IT ANY THE MORE POSSIBLE TO ASSESS THE QUESTION WHETHER THE HIGH AUTHORITY WAS JUSTIFIED AND WITHIN ITS RIGHTS IN REDUCING THAT CRITERION FROM 30 000 TO 20 000 METRIC TONS .
THEREFORE THE COMPLAINT PUT FORWARD BY THE AGENCIES ON THIS POINT MUST BE ACCEPTED AND UPHELD .
AS TO ( E ) IN SUPPORT OF THE REDUCTION OF THE CRITERION OF " AGENCY COAL " FROM 9 000 TO 6 000 METRIC TONS, THE STATEMENT OF REASONS ONLY SAYS " THAT THIS TONNAGE IS ESTABLISHED TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT PRIOR TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMON MARKET THE AGENCIES FOR THE SALE OF COAL FROM THE RUHR ACCEPTED FOR DIRECT SUPPLIES A WHOLESALE TRADER DISTRIBUTING 6 000 METRIC TONS OF COAL FROM THE RUHR PER ANNUM ".
THIS LINE OF REASONING IS IRRELEVANT .
THE MERE REFERENCE TO RULES IN FORCE PRIOR TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMON MARKET IS NOT CONCLUSIVE BECAUSE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT NOTICEABLY DIFFERENT SITUATION ARE INVOLVED, AND THAT WITHOUT SPECIFIC JUSTIFICATION IT WOULD BE WRONG TO TREAT AS ON THE SAME FOOTING :
A SET OF RULES GOVERNING A NATIONAL MARKET AND A SET OF RULES GOVERNING A CONSIDERABLY ENLARGED MARKET :
A SET OF RULES ADOPTED AT A TIME OF NORMAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND OR EVEN OF SCARCITY WITH A SET OF RULES ADOPTED IN A PERIOD OF PLENTY;
A SET OF RULES ESTABLISHED UNDER AN OCCUPATION REGIME AND A SET OF RULES ENVISAGED IN A PERIOD OF NORMAL POLITICAL CONDITIONS .
P . 445
SINCE THE REDUCTION OF THE CRITERION OF " AGENCY COAL " IS NOT SUPPORTED BY SUFFICIENT REASONS AT LAW, THE COMPLAINT RAISED AGAINST IT BY THE AGENCIES MUST BE UPHELD .
IT THEREFORE BECOMES SUPERFLUOUS TO EXAMINE THE COMPLAINT PUT FORWARD BY NOLD