1 BY ORDER OF THE COLLEGE VAN BEROEP VOOR HET BEDRIJFSLEVEN DATED 25 FEBRUARY 1983 , WHICH WAS RECEIVED AT THE COURT ON 10 MARCH 1983 , THE COLLEGE VAN BEROEP VOOR HET BEDRIJFSLEVEN ( ADMINISTRATIVE COURT OF LAST INSTANCE IN MATTERS OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY ), THE HAGUE , REFERRED TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY FOUR QUESTIONS ON THE INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS IN COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1134/68 OF 30 JULY 1968 LAYING DOWN RULES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 653/68 ON CONDITIONS FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT USED FOR THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL , ENGLISH SPECIAL EDITION 1968 ( II ), P . 396 ), AND OF COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1054/78 OF 19 MAY 1978 LAYING DOWN DETAILED RULES FOR THE APPLICATION OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 878/77 ON THE EXCHANGE RATES TO BE APPLIED IN AGRICULTURE AND REPLACING REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 937/77 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 134 , P . 40 ), AS AMENDED BY COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1509/78 OF 30 JUNE 1978 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 178 , P . 50 ).
2 THOSE QUESTIONS WERE RAISED IN PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT AGAINST THE HOOFDPRODUKTSCHAP VOOR AKKERBOUWPRODUKTEN , THE HAGUE , BY THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY BV VERWERKINGS INDUSTRIE VREELAND ( HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ' ' VREELAND ' ' ) WHOSE REGISTERED OFFICE IS AT VREELAND , IN THE NETHERLANDS . ON 30 DECEMBER 1980 AND 2 AND 5 JANUARY 1981 VREELAND OBTAINED CERTIFICATES FOR EXPORT TO NON-MEMBER COUNTRIES OF THREE CONSIGNMENTS OF BUTTER IN THE FORM OF FOOD PREPARATIONS COMING UNDER TARIFF SUBHEADINGS 21.07 G VII ( A ) AND 21.07 G VIII ( A ). THE CERTIFICATES FIXED IN ADVANCE THE REFUND APPLICABLE ON THE DAY OF ISSUE AND WERE VALID UNTIL 31 MAY 1981 AND 30 JUNE 1981 RESPECTIVELY .
3 ON 23 MARCH 1981 THE ITALIAN LIRE WAS DEVALUED BY 6% AND THE POUND STERLING REVALUED BY 22.64% , WHICH LED TO A RELATIVE DEVALUATION OF THE NETHERLANDS GUILDER IN RELATION TO THE ECU OF 2.4906% . THOSE ALTERATIONS BROUGHT ABOUT AT THE SAME TIME AN ALTERATION IN THE RELATION BETWEEN THE EXCHANGE RATES OF THE CURRENCIES CONCERNED AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVE RATES , WHICH REMAINED UNCHANGED IN THE PRESENT CASE . IN THE CASE OF THE NETHERLANDS GUILDER , IN PARTICULAR , THE NEW CENTRAL RATE WAS LESS THAN ITS REPRESENTATIVE RATE . NEVERTHELESS , THE COMMISSION DID NOT ABOLISH THE POSITIVE MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNTS IT HAD PREVIOUSLY APPLIED TO THE NETHERLANDS ; ON THE CONTRARY , IN EXPECTATION OF AN ADAPTATION OF THE REPRESENTATIVE RATES , IT KEPT THE AMOUNTS UNCHANGED UNTIL 5 APRIL 1981 PURSUANT TO REGULATION NO 801/81 OF 27 MARCH 1981 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 82 , P . 17 ).
4 IT WAS NOT UNTIL 6 APRIL 1981 THAT THE COUNCIL ADJUSTED THE REPRESENTATIVE RATES BY MEANS OF REGULATION NO 850/81 OF 1 APRIL 1981 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 90 , P . 1 ). IN THE CASE OF THE NETHERLANDS GUILDER THE REPRESENTATIVE RATE WAS FIXED AT THE LEVEL OF THE NEW CENTRAL RATE .
5 LIKEWISE WITH EFFECT FROM 6 APRIL 1981 , THE TARGET PRICES FOR MILK AND THE INTERVENTION PRICES FOR MILK PRODUCTS WERE FIXED FOR THE 1981/82 MILK YEAR BY COUNCIL REGULATION NO 851/81 OF 1 APRIL 1981 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 90 , P . 6 ), AND THE NEW EXPORT REFUNDS IN THE MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS SECTOR WERE FIXED BY COMMISSION REGULATION NO 922/81 OF 3 APRIL 1981 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 93 , P . 10 ).
6 VREELAND ALLEGED THAT BECAUSE OF THE ABOVE EVENTS IT WAS NO LONGER POSSIBLE TO EXPORT AT A PROFIT ON THE BASIS OF THE REFUNDS FIXED IN ADVANCE AND THEREFORE ON 21 APRIL 1981 REQUESTED THE ANNULMENT OF THE SAID ADVANCE FIXING AND THE CERTIFICATES THEREOF IN SO FAR AS THE CERTIFICATES HAD NOT THEN BEEN USED .
7 WHEN THAT REQUEST WAS REJECTED BY THE HOOFDPRODUKTSCHAP BY DECISIONS OF 18 JUNE AND 25 AUGUST 1981 , VREELAND BROUGHT AN ACTION CHALLENGING THE DECISIONS BEFORE THE COLLEGE VAN BEROEP VOOR HET BEDRIJFSLEVEN , WHICH STAYED THE PROCEEDINGS AND REFERRED THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING : ' ' 1 . ARTICLE 1 ( 2 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1134/68 ENABLES CANCELLATION OF THE ADVANCE FIXING AND THE RELEVANT CERTIFICATE TO BE OBTAINED ' IN CASES WHERE THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ( 1 ) ( A ) APPLY ' . UPON A PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF THAT PARAGRAPH , WAS THERE SUCH A CASE WHEN : THE VALUE OF THE ECU CHANGED ON 23 MARCH 1981 ; THE INTERVENTION PRICES FOR BUTTER WERE REFIXED AS FROM 6 APRIL 1981 BY REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 851/81 ; AND NEW EXPORT REFUNDS FOR MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS WERE INTRODUCED BY REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 922/81 AS FROM 6 APRIL 1981? 2.ARTICLE 4 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1134/68 ENABLES CANCELLATION OF THE ADVANCE FIXING AND OF THE RELEVANT CERTIFICATE TO BE OBTAINED ' IN THE CASE OF AN ALTERATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARITY OF THE CURRENCY OF A MEMBER STATE AND THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT ' . UPON A PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF ARTICLE 4 ( 1 ), WAS THERE SUCH A CASE WHEN THE VALUE OF THE ECU CHANGED ON 23 MARCH 1981? 3.UPON A PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1054/78 , MUST THE MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNTS NOT FIXED IN ADVANCE ALSO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSES OF CALCULATING THE DISADVANTAGE REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) WHEN COMPARING THE SITUATION OF THE PERSON CONCERNED BEFORE AND AFTER THE NEW RATES AND PRICES CAME INTO FORCE? 4.UPON A PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1054/78 , MUST THE PURCHASE PRICE ALSO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSES OF CALCULATING THE DISADVANTAGE REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) WHEN COMPARING THE SITUATION OF THE PERSON CONCERNED BEFORE AND AFTER THE NEW RATES AND PRICES CAME INTO FORCE? ' ' THE FIRST AND SECOND QUESTIONS
8 WITH THE FIRST AND SECOND QUESTIONS , WHICH IT IS CONVENIENT TO TAKE TOGETHER , THE NATIONAL COURT SEEKS ESSENTIALLY TO KNOW WHETHER , AND IF SO SUBJECT TO WHAT CONDITIONS , ARTICLES 1 AND 4 ( 1 ) OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1134/68 OF 30 JULY 1968 GIVES A RIGHT TO CANCELLATION OF THE ADVANCE FIXING OF EXPORT REFUNDS AND THE CERTIFICATE THEREOF IN THE EVENT ON THE ONE HAND OF AN ALTERATION IN THE VALUE OF THE CURRENCIES COMPOSING THE ECU INTER SE AND IN THEIR RELATION TO THE ECU AND ON THE OTHER OF A FRESH FIXING OF THE TARGET AND INTERVENTION PRICES AND THE EXPORT REFUNDS IN THE SECTOR CONCERNED .
9 IN THAT RESPECT THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION MAINTAINS IN SUBSTANCE THAT THE ECU REPRESENTS THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT USED IN THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY PURSUANT TO COUNCIL REGULATION NO 652/79 OF 29 MARCH 1979 . IT FOLLOWS THAT AN ALTERATION IN THE VALUE OF THE CURRENCIES COMPOSING THE ECU INTER SE OR IN RELATION TO THE ECU CONSTITUTES BOTH AN ' ' ALTERATION TO THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT ' ' WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1134/68 AND AN ' ' ALTERATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARITY OF THE CURRENCY OF A MEMBER STATE AND THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT ' ' WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 4 ( 1 ) OF THE SAID REGULATION . MOREOVER , THE INCREASE IN INTERVENTION PRICES AND THE REINTRODUCTION OF EXPORT REFUNDS IN THE SECTOR WHICH OCCURRED ON 6 APRIL 1981 CONSTITUTE AN ' ' ADJUSTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PRICES ' ' WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 1 OF THE AFORESAID REGULATION .
10 THE HOOFDPRODUKTSCHAP VOOR AKKERBOUWPRODUKTEN AND THE COMMISSION ON THE OTHER HAND , CONSIDER THAT THE TERMS ' ' UNIT OF ACCOUNT ' ' AND ' ' PARITY ' ' ARE NO LONGER RELEVANT . THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT , BASED ON THE CONCEPT OF FIXED PARITIES AND DEFINED IN RELATION TO A SPECIFIC QUANTITY OF FINE GOLD , HAS BEEN REPLACED BY THE ECU WHICH EXPRESSES THE RELATIVE RATES BETWEEN THE CURRENCIES OF THE MEMBER STATES FLUCTUATING INTER SE WITHIN CERTAIN MARGINS . IN ADDITION , MONETARY EVENTS NO LONGER DIRECTLY AFFECT AGRICULTURAL PRICES , WHICH ARE FIXED UNDER THE PRESENT SYSTEM BY MEANS OF REPRESENTATIVE RATES . FURTHER , THE CONCEPT OF ADJUSTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PRICES WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1134/68 COVERS ONLY AN ADJUSTMENT WHICH THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO MAKE WHEN DEALING WITH AN ALTERATION IN THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT FOLLOWING AN ALTERATION IN THE PARITY OF THE CURRENCY OF ONE OR MORE MEMBER STATES . THAT CONCEPT THUS DOES NOT COVER DECISIONS IN RELATION TO PRICES SUCH AS THOSE TAKEN ON 6 APRIL 1981 ON THE BASIS OF THE AGRICULTURAL REGULATION AS PART OF THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL PRICES .
11 IN THAT RESPECT IT MUST BE REMEMBERED THAT ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1134/68 GIVES A RIGHT TO CANCELLATION OF THE ADVANCE FIXING OF INTER ALIA EXPORT REFUNDS AND THE RELEVANT CERTIFICATE IN TWO CASES , NAMELY ON THE ONE HAND ' ' IN THE CASE OF AN ALTERATION TO THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT ' ' AND ON THE OTHER IN THE CASE OF ' ' AN ADJUSTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PRICES PURSUANT TO THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 3 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 653/68 ' ' . ARTICLE 4 ( 1 ) THEREOF GIVES A RIGHT TO CANCELLATION MOREOVER ' ' IN THE CASE OF AN ALTERATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARITY OF THE CURRENCY OF A MEMBER STATE AND THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT ' ' .
12 IN THE FIRST PLACE , IN SO FAR AS THE QUESTIONS RELATE TO THE CURRENCY ALTERATIONS WHICH OCCURRED ON 23 MARCH 1981 IT MUST BE OBSERVED THAT THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS REFER EXPRESSLY ONLY TO ALTERATIONS IN THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT OR IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THAT VALUE AND THE PARITY OF THE CURRENCY OF A MEMBER STATE .
13 FURTHER , THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS OF REGULATION NO 1134/68 ARE INTENDED TO ALLOW THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS AND THE COMPETENT NATIONAL AUTHORITIES TO TAKE THE APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO DEAL WITH CURRENCY ALTERATIONS WHICH HAVE A DIRECT EFFECT UPON AGRICULTURAL PRICES . THAT IS NOT THE CASE , HOWEVER , WITH ALTERATIONS IN THE VALUE OF THE ECU OR THE CURRENCIES COMPOSING IT , BECAUSE SINCE THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 878/77 OF 26 APRIL 1977 AGRICULTURAL PRICES HAVE CEASED TO DEPEND ON THE OFFICIAL PARITIES AND CENTRAL RATES OR EFFECTIVE EXCHANGE RATES RESPECTIVELY AND ARE BASED ON THE REPRESENTATIVE RATES OF THE NATIONAL CURRENCIES , WHICH IN THE PRESENT CASE REMAINED UNCHANGED DURING THE PERIOD FROM 23 MARCH TO 5 APRIL 1981 . UNDER THE PRESENT SYSTEM SET UP BY THE AFORESAID REGULATIONS NOS 878/77 AND 652/79 THE CONVERSION OF THE ECU INTO A NATIONAL CURRENCY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY IS MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE REPRESENTATIVE RATES , THE DIFFERENCE IN WHICH IN RELATION TO THE CENTRAL RATES AND EFFECTIVE EXCHANGE RATES RESPECTIVELY IS COMPENSATED FOR BY THE PAYMENT OF MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNTS .
14 THAT CONCLUSION IS CONFIRMED BY THE FACT THAT ARTICLE 4 OF REGULATION NO 878/77 STATES , ALBEIT SUBJECT TO CERTAIN RESERVATIONS , THAT THE PROVISIONS OF REGULATION NO 1134/68 IN RESPECT OF AN ALTERATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARITY OF THE CURRENCY OF A MEMBER STATE AND THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT ARE TO APPLY TO ALTERATIONS IN THE REPRESENTATIVE RATES , WHEREAS THERE IS NO SUCH REFERENCE IN THE RULES SUBSTITUTING THE ECU FOR THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY .
15 IN THE SECOND PLACE , AS REGARDS THE QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE AGRICULTURAL DECISIONS TAKEN WITH EFFECT FROM 6 APRIL 1981 , IT SUFFICES TO OBSERVE THAT ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1134/68 IS CONCERNED ONLY WITH AN ADJUSTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PRICES PURSUANT TO THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 3 OF REGULATION NO 653/68 , THAT IS TO SAY , AN ADJUSTMENT NECESSARY AS A RESULT OF AN ALTERATION IN MONETARY MATTERS HAVING A DIRECT EFFECT ON THE LEVEL OF AGRICULTURAL PRICES AND EFFECTED , IN DEROGATION OF THE EXISTING AGRICULTURAL REGULATIONS , OUTSIDE THE NORMAL DECISIONS ADOPTED UNDER THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS . THAT IS NOT SO IN THE PRESENT CASE SINCE THE DECISIONS IN QUESTION HAVE BEEN ADOPTED NOT AS A RESULT OF THE MONETARY EVENTS OF 23 MARCH 1981 BUT AS PART OF THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF PRICES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE NEW MILK MARKETING YEAR .
16 THAT IS CONFIRMED BY THE FACT THAT THE MEASURES ADJUSTING THE AGRICULTURAL PRICES UNDER THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 3 OF REGULATION NO 653/68 CAN BE ADOPTED ONLY AFTER A LAPSE OF THREE DAYS FOLLOWING THE ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE MEMBER STATE CONCERNED OF AN ALTERATION IN THE PARITY IN QUESTION . IN THE PRESENT CASE THE TARGET AND INTERVENTION PRICES WERE INCREASED AND NEW REFUNDS ESTABLISHED ONLY AFTER THE EXPIRY OF A PERIOD OF TWO WEEKS FOLLOWING THE MONETARY EVENTS OF 23 MARCH 1981 .
17 THE FIRST AND SECOND QUESTIONS MUST THEREFORE BE ANSWERED TO THE EFFECT THAT ARTICLES 1 AND 4 ( 1 ) OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1134/68 OF 30 JULY 1968 GIVE NO RIGHT TO THE CANCELLATION OF THE ADVANCE FIXING OF EXPORT REFUNDS AND OF THE CERTIFICATE ATTESTING THERETO EITHER IN THE CASE OF AN ALTERATION IN THE VALUE OF THE CURRENCIES COMPOSING THE ECU INTER SE AND IN RELATION TO THE ECU , OR IN THE CASE OF THE FIXING AFRESH OF THE TARGET AND INTERVENTION PRICES OR EXPORT REFUNDS IN THE SECTOR CONCERNED IN SO FAR AS THE NEW RATES AND PRICES ARE FIXED AS PART OF THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL PRICES UNDER THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS . THIRD AND FOURTH QUESTIONS
18 THE THIRD AND FOURTH QUESTIONS , WHICH MUST BE TAKEN TOGETHER , ASK IN SUBSTANCE WHETHER IN CALCULATING THE DISADVANTAGE , FOR THE PURPOSE OF CANCELLING THE ADVANCE FIXING , REFERRED TO IN THE COMBINED PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 4 OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 878/77 OF 26 APRIL 1977 AND ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF COMMISSION REGULATION NO 1054/78 OF 19 MAY 1978 , IT IS ALSO NECESSARY TO TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNTS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN FIXED IN ADVANCE AND THE PURCHASE PRICE .
19 IN THAT RESPECT THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION POINTS OUT THAT THE DEFINITION OF ' ' DISADVANTAGE ' ' CONTAINED IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 1054/78 AS AMENDED BY REGULATION NO 1509/78 REFERS TO ' ' THE SUM TOTAL . . . OF THE AMOUNTS APPLICABLE TO A PARTICULAR TRANSACTION ' ' . IT THUS ALSO COVERS MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNTS NOT FIXED IN ADVANCE ESPECIALLY AS A DISADVANTAGE MAY RESULT FROM SUCH AMOUNTS NOT BEING FIXED IN ADVANCE . FURTHERMORE , THE WORDING OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF THE AFORESAID PROVISION , WHICH STIPULATES THAT THE DISADVANTAGE SHOULD BE DETERMINED ' ' BY COMPARING THE SITUATION OF THE INTERESTED PARTY BEFORE AND AFTER THE NEW RATES AND PRICES HAVE TAKEN EFFECT ' ' SHOWS THAT A DISADVANTAGE MAY ALSO RESULT FROM AN ALTERATION IN THE LEVEL OF THE MARKET PRICES CAUSED , THROUGH AN INCREASE IN INTERVENTION PRICES , BY AN ALTERATION OF THE REPRESENTATIVE RATES .
20 THE HOOFDPRODUKTSCHAP VOOR AKKERBOUWPRODUKTEN AND THE COMMISSION , ON THE OTHER HAND , MAINTAIN THAT ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 1054/78 DEFINING WHAT CONSTITUTES A DISADVANTAGE FALLS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF ARTICLE 4 OF REGULATION NO 878/77 . THAT PROVISION REFERS ONLY TO AMOUNTS FIXED IN ADVANCE AND APPLICABLE TO THE TRANSACTION CONCERNED , TO WHICH THE NEW REPRESENTATIVE RATE IS APPLIED TO THE EXCLUSION OF ANY AMOUNTS NOT FIXED IN ADVANCE SUCH AS MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNTS NOT FIXED IN ADVANCE AND PRICES .
21 IN THAT RESPECT IT MUST BE OBSERVED THAT , AS THE HOOFDPRODUKTSCHAP AND THE COMMISSION MAINTAIN , COMMISSION REGULATION NO 1054/78 MUST BE INTERPRETED IN THE LIGHT OF THE BASIC COUNCIL REGULATION . ARTICLE 4 OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 878/77 STATES THAT THE PROVISIONS OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1134/68 ON ALTERATIONS IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARITY OF THE CURRENCY OF A MEMBER STATE AND THE VALUE OF THE UNIT OF ACCOUNT - IN THE PRESENT CASE ARTICLE 4 ( 1 ) THEREOF - ARE TO APPLY TO ALTERATIONS IN THE REPRESENTATIVE RATES . AS FAR AS THE PRESENT CASE IS CONCERNED ARTICLE 4 APPLIES ONLY TO ' ' AMOUNTS WHICH HAVE BEEN FIXED IN ADVANCE FOR TRANSACTION ' ' . IN THE LIGHT OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THOSE PROVISIONS , NEITHER MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNTS NOT FIXED IN ADVANCE NOR THE PURCHASE PRICE MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN CALCULATING THE DISADVANTAGE AS THERE DEFINED .
22 THAT CONSIDERATION IS NOT ALTERED BY THE FACT , TO WHICH THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION REFERRED , THAT ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 1054/78 AS AMENDED BY COMMISSION REGULATION NO 1509/78 ' ' THE DISADVANTAGE SHALL BE DETERMINED BY COMPARING THE SITUATION OF THE INTERESTED PARTY BEFORE AND AFTER THE NEW RATES AND PRICES HAVE TAKEN EFFECT ' ' , SINCE IT IS APPARENT FROM THE PLACE OF THAT PROVISION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE RULES IN QUESTION THAT IT IS CONFINED TO STATING THE SITUATIONS TO BE COMPARED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THE DISADVANTAGE WITHOUT INTRODUCING NEW FACTORS RELATING TO THE BASIS OF THAT COMPARISON .
23 THAT CONCLUSION IS , MOREOVER , BORNE OUT BY THE VERY WORDING OF ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 1054/78 , AS AMENDED , WHICH REFERS ONLY TO AN ALTERATION IN THE AMOUNTS APPLICABLE TO THE TRANSACTION WHICH ' ' RESULTS IN THE LEVYING OF A GREATER AMOUNT , OR THE GRANTING OF A LESSER AMOUNT , THAN THAT APPLICABLE BEFORE ENTRY INTO FORCE ' ' OF THE NEW REPRESENTATIVE RATE . IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT THE PURCHASE PRICE IS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN CALCULATING THE AMOUNTS TO BE LEVIED OR GRANTED .
24 THE THIRD AND FOURTH QUESTIONS MUST THEREFORE BE ANSWERED TO THE EFFECT THAT IN CALCULATING THE DISADVANTAGE , WITH A VIEW TO CANCELLING ADVANCE FIXING , FOR THE PURPOSES OF ARTICLE 4 OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 878/77 OF 26 APRIL 1977 IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) OF COMMISSION REGULATION NO 1054/78 OF 19 MAY 1978 , NO ACCOUNT MUST BE TAKEN EITHER OF MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNTS NOT FIXED IN ADVANCE OR OF THE PURCHASE PRICE .