CLEARLY SHOWED THAT THE DEFENDANT ONLY INTENDED TO INCLUDE IN 'OWN RESOURCES' FERROUS SCRAP TRANSFERRED BETWEEN 'LOCALLY INTEGRATED' UNDERTAKINGS .
THEREFORE SNUPAT, WHOSE WORKS WERE NOT LOCALLY INTEGRATED WITH THOSE OF REGIE RENAULT, COULD NOT REASONABLY HAVE ANTICIPATED BEING GRANTED AN EXEMPTION .
THE MOST IT COULD ENVISAGE WAS THE MERE POSSIBILITY OF ANNULMENT OF THE REFUSAL TO EXTEND THE EXEMPTIONS TO 'GROUP FERROUS SCRAP' OTHER THAN THAT DISCUSSED IN THIS LETTER . HERE TOO THEREFORE THERE WAS NEITHER CERTITUDE NOR PROBABILITY .
MOREOVER, ANY SUCH HOPES WERE CRUSHED BY THE FIRST SNUPAT JUDGMENT ON WHICH THE COURT RULED THAT THE FERROUS SCRAP RECEIVED BY SNUPAT FROM REGIE RENAULT SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO EQUALIZATION .
THE SUBSEQUENT REFUSAL OF THE DEFENDANT TO WITHDRAW THE EXEMPTIONS GRANTED WAS THUS INCAPABLE OF LEADING SNUPAT INTO ERROR IN ITS OWN CASE . THIS LAST COMPLAINT IS ALSO UNFOUNDED .
IT FOLLOWS FROM ALL THESE CONSIDERATIONS THAT THERE IS NO DIRECT RELATIONSHIP OF CAUSE AND EFFECT BETWEEN THE BEHAVIOUR IMPUTED TO THE DEFENDANT AND THE ALLEGED INJURY .
THE APPLICATION MUST THEREFORE BE DISMISSED AS UNFOUNDED .
Decision on costs
UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 69 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THE UNSUCCESSFUL PARTY SHALL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS .
IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED IN ALL ITS SUBMISSIONS .
IT MUST THEREFORE BE ORDERED TO BEAR THE COSTS .
Operative part
THE COURT
HEREBY :
1 . DISMISSES THE APPLICATION AS UNFOUNDED;
2 . ORDERS THE APPLICANT TO PAY THE COSTS .