CELEX: 31995D0366
Language: en
Date: 1995-03-14 00:00:00
Title: 95/366/EC: Commission Decision of 14 March 1995 on aid granted by Italy (Sardinia) in the agriculture sector (Only the Italian text is authentic)

Avis juridique important

|

31995D0366

95/366/EC: Commission Decision of 14 March 1995 on aid granted by Italy (Sardinia) in the agriculture sector (Only the Italian text is authentic)  

Official Journal L 218 , 14/09/1995 P. 0020 - 0027

COMMISSION DECISION of 14  March 1995 on aid granted by Italy (Sardinia) in the agriculture sector (Only the Italian text is  authentic) (95/366/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first  subparagraph of Article 93 (2) thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of  the market in milk and milk products  (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 3290/94  (2), and  in particular Article 24 thereof, Whereas the parties concerned have been given notice to submit their comments in accordance with  Article 93 (2) of the Treaty  (3); Whereas: I By letter of 1 September 1992, recorded as received on 7 September 1992, the Italian Permanent  Representative to the European Communities notified the Commission of Regional Law (Sardinia) No  17/92, pursuant to Article 93 (3) of the Treaty. The Regional Law in question came into force and the aid measures provided for therein were  implemented before the Commission could take a position with regard to them. Furthermore, certain  provisions of Regional Law No 17/92 apply previous legislative provisions which were not notified  pursuant to Article 93 (3). The Commission also considered those provisions, where necessary. The aid measures covered by this Decision are the following: Article 1 of Law No 17/92 The regional administration grants subsidies in the form of lower  interest rates applying to loans taken out by members of cooperatives for the processing and  marketing of agricultural products or of groups thereof, in order to acquire a share in the capital  of such bodies. The application of the measure was limited to 1992 and the funds amounted to Lit 3   000 million. Since no limit is laid down on the utilization of new resources (as represented by the increase in  capital) by the abovementioned cooperatives or groups, the funds could be used not only to finance  future investments or to improve the situation of the enterprises in accordance with rules  complying with the criteria laid down by the Commission for aid to enterprises in difficulty (which  criteria were reiterated in the Commission's letter notifying the Italian Government of its  decision to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 93 (2) of the Treaty  (4), as well as  financing their operating expenditure. Article 3 of Regional Law No 17/92, Article 6 of Regional Law No 17/92, Article 40 of Regional Law  No 14/81 and Article 57 of Regional Law No 44/86 The abovementioned Articles provide for a system  of public intervention to transform liabilities of agricultural cooperatives (measures (a) to (e))  and an individual case of aid to an enterprise (measure (f)). (a)  Article 40 of Law No 14/81 institutes a 'Regional Fund for transforming the liabilities of  agricultural cooperatives`; according to the provisions establishing the fund, it operates by  granting loans at reduced rates for a duration of ten years to the cooperatives in question to  cover their liabilities. (b)  Article 57 of Law No 44/86 provides for the granting of regional financing to cooperatives  undertaking the incorporation of other cooperatives. Such aid is intended to absorb the debts of  the cooperatives incorporated. The Article also provides that finance may also be granted to  cooperatives which decide to cease operating on account of insufficient capital on the part of the  members. (c)  Article 3 (3) of Law No 17/92 provides for the use of resources from the abovementioned fund  to cover the loss of income resulting from the termination by the public administration of loans  made to cooperatives to which Article 40 of Law No 14/81 and Article 57 of Law No 44/86 apply (i.e.  liquidation or incorporation). (d)  Pursuant to Article 3 (4) of Law No 17/92, the resources from the fund are used to finance a  'recapitalization` programme for cooperatives which according to the Regional Law are in a state of  temporary financial imbalance but have potential as shown by their economic recovery. The programme in question was introduced by a decision of the Regional Executive of 27 October  1992, which broke the public funds (Lit 10 thousand million) down into: >TABLE> (e)  A programme similar to that referred to in (d) is set out in Article 3 (5) of Law No 17/92 to  assist the recovery of producers' organizations in a state of financial imbalance as the result of  the insolvency of purchasers of products marketed by the associations. The two associations are: >TABLE> (f)  Article 6 of Law No 17/92 provides for emergency aid granted to CON.SAR.CO.RI. (a consortium  of cooperatives which sells products for agriculture and agricultural products) in the form of a  one-off subsidy of Lit 2  200 million. The aid is intended to cope with the consortium's financial  imbalance as a result of the bankruptcy of certain cooperatives forming part thereof and the  insolvency of others. All these measures satisfy the criteria laid down by the Commission for the appraisal of aid to  enterprises in difficulty. Although they are different in practice, they all have the effect of  absorbing the debts of the recipient cooperatives. No condition is laid down by the regional authorities regarding the origin of such debts;  accordingly, it is impossible to verify compliance with the abovementioned criteria on the basis of  the information provided by the Italian authorities. The state of financial imbalance which  provides the 'condition` for the measures in question may thus have been brought about simply by  the management of the enterprise; on that assumption, the public assistance has the same distorting  effects as any operating aid. The fact that in certain cases the recipients of the aid are enterprises which have ceased  operating is unlikely to neutralize that distorting effect. In practice, the economic advantage conferred by the aid is simply transferred in such cases to the  members of the cooperatives and/or to the persons who financed them and, more generally, the  existence of provisions such as Article 57 of Regional Law No 44/86 (applicable to all cases where  cooperatives cease to operate) results in a priori cancellation of financial liability for the  entrepreneurial risk of the operators who are members of the cooperative. Article 4 of Law No 17/92 and Article 11 of Law No 6/92 Article 4 of Law No 17/92 extends to goat  farmers the advantages provided for sheep farmers by Article 11 of Regional Law No 6/92; this  involves exceptional aid granted as a result of the crisis affecting these sectors and intended to  cover a part of the expenses born by the producers and processors of sheep and goat milk. The  measure was applied solely in relation to production from the 1990/91 marketing year. The aid was  set at Lit 170 per litre of milk. The total expenditure was Lit 29  000 million. These measures constitute operating aid that cannot have any lasting effect on the sectors  concerned as their impact (income supplement) will disappear with the measures themselves. In  addition, they constitute an infringement of the rules laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 on  the common organization of the market in milk and milk products and in particular Article 24  thereof, which prohibits the granting of any aid where the amount therefore is linked to the prices  or quantities of milk or milk products. Article 7 of Law No 17/92 and Article 8 of Law No 17/92 (a)  Article 7 of Law No 17/92 The regional administration has set aside Lit 900 million to cover operating expenditure of the  producers' associations in 1990 and 1991 (Article 7 of Law No 17/92) The way that provision is  worded does not permit the detailed rules for the application of the measure to be determined. (b)  Article 8 of Law No 17/92 This Article provides for the establishment of a fund amounting to Lit 500 million for COLVAS  (Consorzio latte vaccino sardo - Sardinian cow's milk consortium) to cover expenditure as a result  of its activity in accordance with its articles of association. The Commission has decided that this also constitutes operating aid not capable of having any  lasting effect on the sectors concerned since the fund may be used not only to finance investments  but also 'for any management needs`. II 1.  By letter SG(94) D/3934 of 22 March 1994, the Commission notified the Italian Government  that it had decided to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 93 (2) of the Treaty in  respect of the aid measures provided for in Articles 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8 of Sardinian Regional Law  No 17/92 and the aid measures provided for in Article 40 of Regional Law No 14/81, Article 57 of  Regional Law No 44/86 and Article 11 of Regional Law No 6/92. 2.  In that letter, the Commission notified the Italian authorities as follows. In accordance with  its long-standing practice, it considered those aid measures as operating aid contravening Articles  92, 93 and 94 of the Treaty. The aid measures are accordingly likely to distort competition and affect trade between Member  States and they meet the criteria laid down in Article 92 (1) without qualifying under any of the  exceptions provided for in paragraphs 2 and 3 of that Article. In addition, the measure provided for in Article 4 of Law No 17/92 and Article 11 of Law No 6/92  constitutes an infringement of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 on the common organization of the market  in milk and milk products and in particular Article 24 thereof, which prohibits the granting of any  aid where the amount thereof is linked to the prices or quantities of milk or milk products. 3.  As part of that procedure, the Commission gave notice to the Italian Government to submit its  comments. The Commission also gave notice to the other Member States and other interested parties to submit  their comments. III 1.  By telex messages of 5 and 31 January 1995 and by a fax message of 11 January 1995, the  Italian Government submitted remarks concerning the abovementioned measures. (i)  As regards Article 1 of Regional Law No 17/92, the Italian authorities informed the Commission  that the measures provided for therein thave not been applied and stated that they are willing to  amend the legislation in question. In addition, they claim that the general wording of the Article  (like, moreover, that of Article 8) does not in itself constitute an infringement of the Community  rules on State aid, and that such an infringement would occur only if the measures were actually  used to finance the management costs of the recipient enterprises. (ii)  As regards Article 40 of Regional Law No 14/81 and Article 57 of Regional Law No 44/86, the  Italian authorities reiterate the remarks set out above in point (i) concerning the general nature  of the provisions and state they are willing to amend them. In addition, they point out that: -  the resources in the fund established by Article 40 of Regional Law No 14/81 will henceforth be  used in addition to finance aid as provided for in Article 57 of Regional Law No 44/86, -  as a result of the remarks of the Commission when the procedure was initiated, the utilization  of the fund in question was limited, by decision of the Regional Executive No 18/15 of 21 June 1994  to the absorption of debts of cooperatives which decide spontaneously to cease operating, and to  the granting of loans at reduced rates of interest to agricultural cooperatives in order to  'refinance the costs incurred by the latter, without public financing being granted, for works and  projects and/or the purchase of machines and tools in compliance with the limits on rates of aid  authorized by the EEC` or to 'cope with economic/financial imbalances which may be put down to  natural disasters or exceptional weather conditions`. (iii)  As a consequence, as regards Article 57 of Regional Law No 44/86, the Italian authorities  informed the Commission that in the wake of the latter's observations, mergers involving the  incorporation of cooperatives were no longer eligible for the aid intended to assist the recovery  of the cooperatives incorporated; they are willing to repeal the provisions. (iv)  As regards Articles 3 and 6 of Regional Law No 17/92, the Italian authorities stated that the  measures in question were adopted as a result of crises caused by a lengthy drought or the  insolvency of the customers of certain cooperatives. (v)  As regards Article 4 of Regional Law No 17/92 and Article 11 of Regional Law No 6/92, the  Italian Government informed the Commission that the granting of aid was suspended as a result of  the initiation of the procedure provided for in Article 93 (2) of the Treaty by the Commission. In  addition, the Italian Government wishes to point out that the measure in question was adopted with  a view to remedying the crisis in the sheep and goat sector as a result of a lengthy drought. (vi)  As regards the aid provided for in Article 7 of Regional Law No 17/92 (aid to producer  groups), the Italian Government states that, although this is not clear from Article 7, the aid is  granted pursuant to Regional Law No 15/83 implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1360/78 and is paid in  accordance with Regulations (EEC) No 2083/80 and (EEC) No 2084/80. 2.  Comments were forwarded by Confindustria - Associazione dell'Industria della Sardegna  (hereinafter referred to as 'Confindustria`). 3.  The remarks from Confindustria stress the following: -  the aid measures provided for in Regional Law No 17/92 are an expression of Sardinia's  long-standing policy towards agricultural cooperatives; that policy appears to be implemented in  defiance of all economic logic by funding enterprises in difficulties to keep them in the market.  This approach had adverse effects on the one hand on cooperatives since they were receiving regular  injections of public money and on the other hand on the economic operators who are not members of  cooperatives, who had to cope with conditions of competition distorted by public intervention, -  the only aim of the aid in question is to cover the liabilities of cooperatives in order to  ensure they survive; public intervention is not dependent on investments or any other conditions on  granting it. IV 1.  As regards the aid provided for in Article 7 of Regional Law No 17/92 (refinancing of aid  to producer groups as provided for in Regional Law No 15/83 pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No  1360/78), since the measures provided for in Law No 15/83 are not capable of being evaluated under  Articles 92, 93 and 94 of the Treaty, the procedure initiated by the Commission pursuant to Article  93 (2) in respect of the refinancing measure (Article 7 of Regional Law No 17/92) has no purpose. 2.  As regards the other provisions covered by the Commission's decision to initiate the procedure  provided for in Article 93 (2), namely Articles 1, 3, 4, 6 and 8 of Regional Law No 17/92, Article  40 of Regional Law No 14/81, Article 57 of Regional Law No 44/86 and Article 11 of Regional Law No  6/92, the following remarks should be made. The Italian Government has failed to fulfil its obligation under Article 93 (3) of the Treaty,  first by failing to notify the aid measures in question at the draft stage and secondly by  implementing them before the Commission could take a position with regard to them. Those breaches have brought about a particularly serious situation since, as the Commission had  occasion to note when examining the measures, certain provisions of Law No 17/92 simply apply other  legislative provisions adopted in the past, which have never been notified pursuant to Article 93  (3). In addition, the aid measures provided for in the provisions in question are, from the point of  view of substance and for the reasons set out below, incompatible with the common market under  Article 92 of the Treaty. 3.  As regards the arguments put forward by the Italian Government, the Commission points out the  following: (i)  with regard to the Italian Government's argument that the very general drafting of a national  provision providing for aid does not permit such aid to be considered incompatible with the  provisions of the Treaty on State aids except on the introduction of the measures themselves, it  suffices to point out that the system for verifying national aid introduced by the Treaty is based  on the obligation of the Member States to notify the Commission, in sufficient time for the latter  to put forward its comments, of any draft aid measure introducing or amending aid measures. As the  Commission pointed out in its letter SG(89) D/5521 of 27 April 1989 to the Member States, '[  .  .   .  ] The Commission considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligation to notify it  where the process of putting aid into effect has been initiated. By "putting into effect" it means  not the action of granting aid to the recipient but rather the prior action of instituting or  implementing the aid at a legislative level according to the constitutional rules of the Member  State concerned. Aid is therefore deemed to have been put into effect as soon as the legislative  machinery enabling it to be granted without form or formality has been set up. [  .  .  .  ]`, (ii)  the restriction on the application of aid for assisting the recovery of enterprises provided  for in Article 57 of Regional Law No 44/86 (financed by the fund instituted by Article 40 of  Regional Law No 14/81) to the cases referred to in Regional Executive Decision No 18/15 of 21 June  1994 provides no remedy to the incompatibility of the aid measures in question. Namely: -  the Regional Executive Decision was not adopted until 21 June 1994; from a temporal point of  view, therefore, the restriction provided for therein could not in itself affect the appraisal of  the aid measures in question as regards the period from the entry into force of the disputed  provisions until its adoption, -  at all events, from the point of view of substance, the change/restriction introduced is not  likely to ensure that the aid measures thus amended are compatible with the common market since no  change was made with regard to the aid for cooperatives which cease operating of their own accord  and the conditions on the granting of the aid (which therefore continued to be applied) in other  cases are more restrictive; however, they are not always in line with the conditions required by  the Commision when considering national aid of this type (which conditions were set out in the  Commission's letter notifying the Italian Government of its decision to intitiate the procedure  provided for in Article 93 (2) of the Treaty  (1). (iii)  The Italian authorities' argument that certain aid measures may be justified as aid granted  following a natural disaster has already been put forward in their correspondence with the  Commission before the decision to initiate the procedure. In this connection, the Commission did in fact remind the Italian authorities of the criteria  adopted by the Commission when considering aid measures of this type and requested that information  on the aid in question should be forwarded to allow them to verify compliance with those criteria  (Commission telex message of 27 May 1993) and, as a consequence, to ascertain the possibility of  considering the aid compatible with the common market under the exception provided for in Article  92 (2) (b), namely as aid to make good the damage caused to farmers by exceptional weather  conditions. The Commission would like to point out that, in accordance with its long-standing practice,  exceptional weather such as droughts cannot be treated in the same way as natural disasters within  the meaning of Article 92 (2) (b) except under certain conditions, to ensure in particular that  only agricultural operators who have suffered damage exceeding the level to which they should  normally be liable as a normal risk of agricultural holdings should receive the aid/reimbursement.  To that end, a minimum threshold of rate of losses suffered by each holder (30  % of gross normal  production - 20  % in less-favoured regions) has been set. The Italian Government has not provided (and the Commission has not seen) any information showing  that those conditions are met in the case in point. In view of the foregoing, the justifications put forward by the Italian Government cannot be  accepted by the Commission. As regards the desire expressed by the Italian authorities to amend the regional legislation in  question, the Commission takes not and is willing to provide the necessary assistance for the  implementation of Article 2 hereof. V As operating aid for agricultural holdings, the aid in question has the effect of reducing the  costs of the recipient holdings, thereby facilitating the disposal of the goods produced and/or  marketed by the latter. Accordingly, the aid improves the commercial situation of the recipient enterprises as compared  with their competitors who do not receive that assistance. In accordance with Article 92 (1) of the Treaty, aid granted by Member States or through State  resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring  certain undertakings or the production of certain goods is incompatible with the common market  insofar as it affects trade between Member States. As the measures in question apply 'across the board` by affecting all sectors of agricultural  production, all agricultural products may be affected by the aid in question. Accordingly, the measures are likely to affect trade in agricultural products between the Member  States (the value of which, as regards Italy, amounted to around ECU 13  800 million for imports  and around ECU 6  800 million for exports in 1993  (1), which trade is affected where aid favours  national production to the detriment of imports from other Member States. In view of the foregoing, the aid in question should be considered State aid meeting the criteria  laid down in Article 92 (1) of the Treaty. VI Article 92 (1) of the Treaty provides that aid meeting the criteria it sets out is in  principle incompatible with the common market. The exceptions to that rule laid down in Article 92 (2) are clearly not applicable to the aid  measures in question. The exceptions provided for in Article 92 (3) state that the objectives must be pursued in the  interests of the Community and not only in that of individual sectors of a national economy. These exceptions (which must be interpreted strictly) can be allowed in particular only where the  Commission can establish that the aid is necessary to achieve one of the objectives of those  provisions. To allow such exceptions in respect of aid which does not offer such guarantees would  amount to allowing trade between the Member States to be affected and competition to be distorted  unjustifiably from the viewpoint of the Community interest and would, by corollary, give operators  in certain Member States an undue advantage. In the case in point, the conditions on the granting of the aid in question do not offer such  guarantees since the Italian Government has been unable to provide any justification and the  Commission could find none, showing that the aid in question fulfils the conditions required for  allowing any of the exceptions set out in Article 92 (3). The measures are not intended to promote an important project of common European interest within  the meaning of Article 92 (3) (b), all the more so as their possible effects on trade run counter  to the common interest. Nor are the measures suitable to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State  within the meaning of the same provision. As regards the exceptions provided for in Article 92 (3) (a) and (c) covering aid to promote or  facilitate the economic development of certain areas or certain activities, it should be pointed  out that the measures in question, on account of their status as operating aid, cannot improve in  any lasting manner the conditions affecting the recipients. In other words, the aid measures have  no effect on the structural situation of the recipients since their effects disappear as soon as  they cease. Accordingly, the aid cannot qualify under any of the exceptions provided for in Article 92 (3). In addition, as far as the aid for producers of sheep and goat milk (Article 4 of Regional Law No  17/92 and Article 11 of Regional Law No 6/92) is concerned, such aid must be considered as  involving a product subject to a common organization of the market and there are limits to the  powers of the Member States to intervene in the way such organizations, which entail, in  particular, a system of common prices, which is now the exclusive province of the Union, operate  and there is an explicit prohibition of any aid based on quantities produced. The common market organizations should be considered as comprehensive, self-contained systems  excluding any possibility of the Member States' adopting measures derogating therefrom or  undermining them. The aid measures in question should therefore be considered as infringing Community rules.  Accordingly, none of the exceptions laid down in Article 92 (3) can be invoked. The aid measures in question are therefore incompatible with the common market. VII The Commission should have been notified pursuant to Article 93 (3) of the regional measures  referred to in Section I above (excepting those provided for in Article 7 of Regional Law No  17/92). Since the Italian Government omitted to do so, the Commission was not able to take a  position on the planned aid before its implementation. As a consequence, the aid is illegal having  regard to Community law once it is granted since Article 93 (3) was not complied with. In this respect, it should be remembered that in view of the binding nature of the procedural rules  laid down in Article 93 (3), which the Court of Justice recognized as having direct effect in (more  particularly) its judgments of 19 June 1973 in Case 77/72  (1) and of 21 November 1991 in Case  354/90  (2), the illegal nature of the aid in question cannot be redressed after the event. In addition, in the event that aid measures are incompatible with the common market, the Commission  may have recourse to the possibility afforded it by the judgment of the Court of Justice of 12 July  1973 in Case 70/72  (3), as confirmed by the judgments of 24 February 1987 in Case C-310/85  (4)  and of 20 September 1990 in Case C-5/89  (5), and compel the Member State to recover from the  recipients all aid granted illegally. VIII As pointed out in Title VII, the Commission may require the Member States to compel the  recipients of aid granted illegally to reimburse it. In view of the foregoing, the aid granted by the Sardinian Region pursuant to the provisions  referred to in Section I (excepting the measures provided for in Article 7 of Regional Law No  17/92) must be reimbursed. Reimbursement must take place in accordance with the procedures and provisions of Italian law and  in particular those concerning interest on delayed repayment of debts due to the State, interest  becoming payable as from the date of granting of the illegal aid in question (Commission letter to  the Member States SG(91) D/4571). Such reimbursement is necessary to re-establish the situation obtaining beforehand and requires  that all financial advantages from which the enterprises receiving the illegally granted aid have  benefited unduly since the payment of the aid must be cancelled. This Decision is without prejudice to any consequences which the Commission may draw, where  applicable, as regards the financing of the common agricultural policy by the European Agricultural  Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The aid measures provided for in Articles 1, 3, 4, 6 and 8 of  Sardinian Regional Law No 17/92 and in Article 40 of Regional Law No 14/81, Article 57 of Regional  Law No 44/86 and Article 11 of Regional Law No 6/92 are illegal since they have been established in  breach of the rules of procedure set out in Article 93 (3) of the Treaty. Furthermore, they are  also incompatible with the common market under Article 92 (1) of the Treaty since they do not meet  the conditions for the exceptions provided for in Article 92 (2) and (3) thereof. Article 2 Italy is required to repeal the provisions referred to in Article 1 or to amend them so  as to render them compatible to the common market within two months of the date of notification of  this Decision. Article 3 1.  Within two months of the date of notification of this Decision, Italy shall require  the repayment of: -  the aid paid to Apoac - Santa Sperate, Cantina sociale di Mogoro, Cantina sociale di Santadi,  Cantina sociale di Villacidro, Consorzio caseario del Gerrei, Consorzio sardo caseario - S. Gavino,  Cooperativa allevatori fonnesi (Nuoro), Cooperativa 'L'asparago` - Sanluri, Cooperativa pastori S.  Giovanni, Latteria sociale cooperativa - Meana sardo, Latteria sociale - Santadi, Oleificio  cooperative - Sassari, Organizzazione ortofrutticola oristanese, pursuant to Article 3 (4) of  Sardinian Regional Law No 17/92; -  the aid paid to the 'Associazione produttori ovi-caprini` and to the 'Assozaciazione nuorese  produttori` pursuant to Article 3  (5) of Sardinian Regional Law No 17/92; -  the aid paid to CON.SAR.CO.RI. pursuant to Article 6 of Sardinian Regional Law No 17/92; -  the aid paid to Colvas pursuant to Article 8 of Sardinian Regional Law No 17/92; -  the aid paid pursuant to Article 40 of Regional Law No 14/81, Article 57 of Regional Law No  44/86, Article 11 of Regional Law No 6/92 and Article 4 of Regional Law No 17/92. 2.  The aid provided for in Article 3 (3) of Regional Law No 17/92 having been granted in the form  of a waiver of loan debts owed to the public administration, recovery shall take place by  collecting the debts concerned. 3.  Recovery shall take place in accordance with the procedures and provisions of Italian law and  in particular those concerning interest arising out of delayed repayment of debts owed to the  State. The sums to be recovered shall incur interest as from the date of granting of the legal aid  in question and, as regards the aid measures provided for in Article 3 (3) of Regional Law No  17/92, as from the date on which the loans granted by the public administration fall due. Article 4 Italy shall inform the Commission, within two months from the date of notification of  this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it. Article 5 This Decision is addressed to the Italian Republic. Done at Brussels, 14 March 1995. For the Commission Franz FISCHLER Member of the Commission (1)  OJ No C 159, 10. 6. 1994.  (1)  Source: Eurostat.  (1)  [1973] ECR 611.  (2)  [1991] ECR 5505.  (3)  [1973] ECR 813.  (4)  [1987] ECR 901.  (5)  [1990] ECR I-3437.