RESPECT OF EACH OF THEM, OF THE CRITERIA ON THE BASIS OF WHICH DERIVED INTERVENTION PRICES MUST BE FIXED SO AS TO HAVE REGARD TO THE NATURAL CONDITIONS OF PRICE FORMATION .
14 TRANSPORT COSTS BETWEEN THE AREAS, IN PARTICULAR FROM THE SURPLUS AREAS TO THE DEFICIT AREAS ARE A WEIGHTY COMPONENT OF THESE CRITERIA, BUT OTHER COMPONENTS LIKEWISE ENTER INTO ACCOUNT, SUCH AS THE GEOGRAPHICAL SITUATION OF THE SURPLUS AND DEFICIT AREAS, THE NEEDS OF OTHER CONSUMER AREAS, IMPORTS FROM THIRD COUNTRIES AND THE POSSIBILITIES OF EXPORT .
15 ALTHOUGH THIS SYSTEM CAN GIVE RISE, IN CERTAIN SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, TO THE FIXING OF DERIVED PRICES WHICH DIFFER SLIGHTLY FROM PRICES WHICH WOULD ARISE IN A FREE MARKET, IT MUST NEVERTHELESS BE REGARDED AS BASICALLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 4 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 120/67, ESPECIALLY AS THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE SUCH AS TO LEAVE A CERTAIN MARGIN OF DISCRETION TO THE COUNCIL .
16 IT IS RIGHT THEREFORE TO CONCLUDE THAT THE DERIVED INTERVENTION PRICES FIXED BY REGULATION NO 1210/70, WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE SYSTEM OF REGIONALIZATION PROVIDED FOR BY REGULATION NO 131/67, ACCORD WITH REGULATION NO 120/67 .
17 THE APPLICANT IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS HAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE DERIVED INTERVENTION PRICES FIXED BY REGULATION NO 1210/70 ARE OF SUCH A NATURE AS TO DISTURB THE NORMAL PATTERN OF TRADE, THEREBY INFRINGING ARTICLE 6 OF REGULATION NO 131/67 .
18 IN THIS RESPECT IT APPEARS FROM THE STATISTICS IN THE FILE THAT THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET HAS INVOLVED CERTAIN ALTERATIONS IN THE TRADITIONAL PATTERN OF TRADE RELATING TO CEREAL PRODUCTS, ESPECIALLY IN NORTHERN FRANCE .
19 THESE ALTERATIONS, HOWEVER, FAR FROM CONSTITUTING DISTURBANCES IN THE NORMAL PATTERN OF TRADE, MUST BE REGARDED AS RESULTING FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SINGLE MARKET AND THUS ARISING FROM THE ATTAINMENT OF THE OBJECTIVE OF THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET .
20 IT FOLLOWS THAT THE DERIVED INTERVENTION PRICES FIXED BY REGULATION NO 1210/70 ARE NOT INCOMPATIBLE WITH ARTICLE 6 OF REGULATION NO 131/67 .
21 FINALLY, THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS HAS REFERRED TO THE PROHIBITION ON ANY DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN PRODUCERS OR CONSUMERS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY CONTAINED IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 40 ( 3 ) OF THE TREATY AND MENTIONED AGAIN IN ARTICLE 3 OF REGULATION NO 131/67 .
22 DIFFERENCE IN TREATMENT CANNOT BE REGARDED AS CONSTITUTING DISCRIMINATION WHICH IS PROHIBITED UNLESS IT APPEARS ARBITRARY .
23 PRICE DIFFERENCES RESULTING FROM REGULATION NO 1210/70 FOR PRODUCERS AND CONSUMERS OF WHEAT ARE DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF OBJECTIVE CRITERIA PROPER TO THE COMMON RULES OF THE MARKET AND CANNOT THEREFORE BE REGARDED AS DISCRIMINATORY .
24 IT IS THEREFORE RIGHT TO REPLY TO THE QUESTION RAISED BY THE CONSEIL D'ETAT THAT THE EXAMINATION OF THIS QUESTION HAS NOT REVEALED MATTERS OF A NATURE SUCH AS TO AFFECT THE VALIDITY OF REGULATION NO 1210/70 OF THE COUNCIL .
Decision on costs