JUDGMENT OF 23.4.1956 -JOINED CASES 7 AND 9/54 INDUSTRIES SIDERURGIQUES LUXEMBOURGEOISES V HIGH AUTHORITY

In Joined Cases 7 and 9/54

THE COURT composed of: M. Pilotti, President, J. Rueff and O. Riese (Presidents of Chambers), P. J. S. Serrarens, L. Delvaux, Ch. L. Hammes and A. van Kleffens, Judges, Advocate General: K. Roemer Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Facts

1 — Facts and procedure

2 — Submissions and arguments of the parties

LAW

THE COURT

1. Consequences of the joinder of Applications 7/54 and 9/54

Part One

Application 7/54

A — The Admissibility of Application 7/54

I — The regularity of the procedure

II— The capacity ofthe applicant to raise the matter with the High Authority in application of Article 35 of the Treaty

III — The capacity of the applicant to institute proceedings before the Court of Justice against the implied decision of refusal which is to be inferred from the silence of the High Authority

IV — The interest of the applicant in proceeding with its action at law after the repeal by Ministerial Order of 12 September 1955 with effect from 2 April 1955 of the Ministerial Order of 8 March 1954 concerning the operation of the Caisse de Compensation attached to the Office Commercial du Ravitaillement

B — The substance of Application 7/54

I — The subject-matter of the application

II — The compatibility of the Caisse de Compensation with the provisions of the Treaty

C — Submission concerning infringement of the Treaty

I — Is Article 4 directly applicable or only as provided in this Treaty?

II — Is the levy imposed by the Caisse de Compensation a special charge prohibited by Article 4 (c) of the Treaty?

III — Is the levy imposed by the Caisse de Compensation a measure or practice which discriminates and which is abolished and prohibited by Article 4 (b) of the Treaty?

IV — Should the abolition of the import monopoly conferred on the Office Commercial du Ravitaillement have involved the abolition of the Caisse de Compensation which had been attached to it?

V — Does the levy imposed by the Caisse de Compensation infringe the decisions of the High Authority fixing, in application of Article 63 (2) (a) of the Treaty, maximum prices for hard coke and industrial coal from certain coalfields?

VI — Is the Caisse de Compensation incompatible with the fundamental principles of the Common Market?

D — The submissions concerning the infringement of essential procedural requirements

E — Costs

Part Two

Application 9/54)

E — Costs