CELEX: C2002/017/02
Language: en
Date: 2002-01-19 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 22 November 2001 in Case C-301/97: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Council of the European Union (Arrangements for association of overseas countries and territories — Imports of rice originating in the overseas countries and territories — Safeguard measures — Regulation (EC) No 1036/97 — Action for annulment)

19.1.2002               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                               C 17/1
                                                                         I
                                                                   (Information)
                                                     COURT OF JUSTICE
                                                               COURT OF JUSTICE
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                       Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar,
                                                                             has given a judgment on 22 November 2001, in which it:
                      of 22 November 2001                                    1.    Dismisses the action as unfounded.
                                                                             2.    Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.
in Case C-110/97: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Council
                    of the European Union (1)                                3.    Orders the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian
                                                                                   Republic, and the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                   to bear their own costs.
(Arrangements for association of overseas countries and
territories — Imports of rice originating in the overseas                    (1) OJ C 181 of 14.6.1997.
countries and territories — Safeguard measures — Regu-
       lation (EC) No 304/97 — Action for annulment)
                          (2002/C 17/01)
                                                                                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                    (Language of the case: Dutch)
                                                                                                    of 22 November 2001
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                             in Case C-301/97: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Council
                   in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                                  of the European Union (1)
                                                                             (Arrangements for association of overseas countries and
                                                                             territories — Imports of rice originating in the overseas
                                                                             countries and territories — Safeguard measures — Regu-
In Case C-110/97: Kingdom of the Netherlands (Agent:
                                                                                   lation (EC) No 1036/97 — Action for annulment)
M.A. Fierstra) v Council of the European Union (Agents:
R. Torrent, J. Huber and G. Houttuin), supported by Kingdom
of Spain (Agent: L. Pérez de Ayala Becerril), French Republic                                           (2002/C 17/02)
(Agents: K. Rispal-Bellanger and C. Chavance), Italian Republic
(Agent: by U. Leanza and F. Quadri), and Commission of the                                        (Language of the case: Dutch)
European Communities (Agent: T. van Rijn) — application
for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 304/97 of                        (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
17 February 1997 introducing safeguard measures in respect                                       in the European Court Reports)
of imports of rice originating in the overseas countries and
territories (OJ 1997 L 51, p. 1) — the Court, composed of:
G.C. Rodrı́guez Iglesias, President, P. Jann and F. Macken
(Rapporteur) (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann,                           In Case C-301/97: Kingdom of the Netherlands (Agents:
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, J.P. Puissochet, L. Sevón,                    J.S. van den Oosterkamp and M.A. Fierstra) v Council of the
M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen and V. Skouris, Judges; P. Léger,                  European Union (Agents: R. Torrent, J. Huber and G. Houttuin),
 ---pagebreak--- C 17/2                  EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                             19.1.2002
supported by Kingdom of Spain (Agent: N. Dı́az Abad), French              (Civil Division) (United Kingdom), for a preliminary ruling in
Republic (Agents: K. Rispal-Bellanger and C. Chavance), Italian           the proceedings pending before that court between H.J. Banks
Republic (Agents: U. Leanza, assisted by F. Quadri) and the               & Co. Ltd v The Coal Authority, Secretary of State for Trade
Commission of the European Communities (Agents P.J. Kuijper               and Industry — on the interpretation of Article 4(b) and (c) of
and T. van Rijn) — application for the annulment of Council               the ECSC Treaty and of Commission Decision
Regulation (EC) No 1036/97 of 2 June 1997 introducing                     No 3632/93/ECSC of 28 December 1993 establishing Com-
safeguard measures in respect of imports of rice originating in           munity rules for State aid to the coal industry (OJ 1993 L 329,
the overseas countries and territories (OJ 1997 L 151, p. 8) —            p. 12) — the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodriguez Iglesias,
the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodrı́guez Iglesias, President,              President, C. Gulmann, A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet and
P. Jann, F. Macken (Rapporteur) (Presidents of Chambers),                 V. Skouris (Presidents of Chambers), D.A.O. Edward,
C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, J.P. Puissochet,                J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), P. Jann, L. Sevón, R. Schintgen
L. Sevón, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen and V. Skouris, Judges;              and F. Macken, Judges; N. Fennelly, Advocate General; L. Hew-
P. Léger, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar,            lett, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 22 November 2001,              20 September 2001, in which it has ruled:
in which it:
1.    Dismisses the action as unfounded.
2.    Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.
                                                                          1.    A situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings from
                                                                                the restructuring date until the transfer to the successful private
3.    Orders the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian             tendering undertakings of the shares of the Crown-owned
      Republic and the Commission of the European Communities to                companies which succeeded British Coal Corporation as operator
      bear their own costs.                                                     implies the existence of aid, within the meaning of Article 4(c)
                                                                                of the ECSC Treaty, but not of special charges within the
                                                                                meaning of that provision. The same situation may constitute
(1) OJ C 318 of 18.10.1997.                                                     discrimination between producers, within the meaning of
                                                                                Article 4(b) of the same Treaty. That would be the case if
                                                                                significant objective differences in situation between, on the one
                                                                                hand, British Coal Corporation and the Crown companies
                                                                                which succeeded it as operator, and, on the other hand, the
                                                                                other operators, did not justify the differentiated treatment
                                                                                applied to the two categories of producers.
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                A situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, as
                                                                                from the time of the transfer of the shares of the Crown-owned
                      of 20 September 2001                                      companies which succeeded British Coal Corporation as operator
                                                                                to the successful private tendering undertakings, does not reveal
in Case C-390/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                       the existence of aid or special charges within the meaning of
the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division)):                        Article 4(c) of the Treaty, or discrimination between producers,
H.J. Banks & Co. Ltd v The Coal Authority, Secretary of                         within the meaning of Article 4(b) of the Treaty, since access to
                 State for Trade and Industry (1)                               the various means of acquiring the lease and licence rights was
                                                                                not, and is not, discriminatory.
(ECSC Treaty — Licences to extract raw coal — Discrimi-
nation between producers — Special charges — State aid —
Article 4(b) and (c) of the Treaty — Decision
No 3632/93/ECSC — Code on aid to the coal industry —
Direct effect — Respective powers of the Commission and                   2.    Article 4(b) of the Treaty, in so far as it concerns discrimination
                        the national courts)                                    between producers, and the first sentence of Article 9(4) of
                                                                                Commission Decision No 3632/93/ECSC of 28 December
                                                                                1993 establishing Community rules for State aid to the coal
                          (2002/C 17/03)                                        industry directly confer rights upon individuals which the
                                                                                national courts must protect. On the other hand, Article 4(c) of
                    (Language of the case: English)                             the Treaty, in so far as it concerns the compatibility of aid with
                                                                                the common market, does not itself create such rights. However,
                                                                                the national courts have jurisdiction to interpret the concept of
                                                                                aid for the purposes of Article 4(c) of the Treaty and Article 1
                                                                                of Decision No 3632/93, with a view to drawing the
In Case C-390/98: reference to the Court under Article 41 of                    consequences from any infringement of the first sentence of
the ECSC Treaty from the Court of Appeal (England & Wales)                      Article 9(4) of that decision.