1 BY APPLICATION SUBMITTED ON 31 AUGUST 1973, THE APPLICANT IN CASE 24/66 REQUESTED, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 40 OF THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY, AN INTERPRETATION OF THE JUDGMENT OF 1 JULY 1965, GIVEN IN JOINED CASES 106 AND 107/63 ( REC . 1965, P . 526 ) AND OF THE INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT OF 14 JULY 1967 GIVEN IN JOINED CASES 5, 7 AND 13 TO 24/66 ( REC . 1967, P . 318 ).
2 THE APPLICATION IS FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF THE EXTENT OF THE LEGAL FORCE OF THESE JUDGMENTS, IN PARTICULAR WITH REGARD TO THE QUESTION WHETHER THEY HAVE BINDING EFFECT ON NATIONAL COURTS, IN THAT 1 . THEY AFFIRMED THAT THE CONDITIONS NECESSARY FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE PROTECTIVE MEASURE DECIDED UPON BY THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY AND APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION BY DECISION OF 3 OCTOBER 1963 HAD NOT BEEN FULFILLED AND 2 . THEY ESTABLISHED THE PRINCIPLES WITH RELATION TO THE DEGREE OF CARE WHICH COMMUNITY OR NATIONAL AUTHORITIES MUST SHOW IN ADOPTING PROTECTIVE MEASURES PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 22 OF REGULATION NO 19/62 OF THE COUNCIL ( OJ 1962, P . 933 ).
3 AS FOR THE FIRST PART OF THE APPLICATION, THE JUDGMENT OF 14 JULY 1967, GIVEN IN THE ACTION BROUGHT BY THE APPLICANT AND OTHER PARTIES, CONTAINED NO FINDING AS TO THE ILLEGALITY OF THE COMMISSION' S DECISION OF 3 OCTOBER 1963, BEING MERELY CONCERNED TO DEFINE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE JUDGMENT OF 1 JULY 1965, WHICH ANNULLED THAT DECISION WITH GENERAL EFFECT . ACCORDINGLY, THE FIRST PART OF THE APPLICATION REFERS SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE EFFECTS OF THE JUDGMENT OF 1 JULY 1965 . HOWEVER, SINCE THE APPLICANT WAS NOT A PARTY TO THE CASE IN WHICH THIS JUDGMENT WAS GIVEN, ARTICLE 40 OF THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE THEREBY RENDERS ITS APPLICATION FOR INTERPRETATION INADMISSIBLE .
4 THE SECOND PART OF THE APPLICATION SEEKS A DEFINITION OF THE BINDING EFFECT WHICH A JUDGMENT GIVEN BY THE COURT IN AN ACTION FOR NONCONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ON THE PART OF THE COMMUNITY COULD HAVE UPON PARALLEL ACTIONS BEFORE NATIONAL COURTS AGAINST THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY . SINCE THIS CONCERNS PROCEEDINGS BETWEEN DIFFERENT PARTIES, THE DEFINITION REQUESTED DOES NOT CONCERN THE SCOPE OF THE JUDGMENT AS REGARDS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARTIES THERETO, AND MAY NOT ACCORDINGLY BE SOUGHT UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE STATUTE .
5 IT MUST THEREFORE BE CONCLUDED THAT THE SECOND PART OF THE APPLICATION IS ALSO INADMISSIBLE .