JUDGMENT OF 21. 6. 1958 — CASE 13/57 EISEN- UND STAHLINDUSTRIE v HIGH AUTHORITY

In Case 13/57

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

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Issues of fact

1. Facts

2. Conclusions of the parties

3. Submissions and arguments of the parties

A — Admissibility

1. Whether the contested decision constitutes a series of decisions which are individual in character within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 33 of the Treaty and which concern each of the applicants in particular

2. Whether claims based upon different and quite distinct interests may be submitted in the same application

3. Whether an application by an association of undertakings is admissible if the individual interests of the undertakings which are members of the association differ

4. Whether the submissions put forward by the applicants constitute complaints of misuse of powers

B — Substance

First complaint: Misuse of powers with regard to Articles 57 and 59 and Annex II to the Treaty.

Second complaint: Misuse of powers with regard to Article 54 and 57 of the Treaty.

Third complaint: Misuse of powers with regard to Articles 58 and 59 of the Treaty.

Fourth compaint: Misuse of powers with regard to Articles 3 and 53 (1) (b) of the Treaty.

Fifth complaint: Misuse of powers with regard to Articles 2, 3,4 and 5 of the Treaty.

Sixth complaint: Misuse of powers with regard to Article 65 of the Treaty.

Seventh complaint: The High Authority has infringed Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 53, 54, 58, 59 and 65 of the Treaty together with Annex II thereto.

4. Procedure

Law

A — Admissibility

B — Substance

1. The submission of misuse of powers with regard to Article 53 (b) and Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Treaty, that is to say, that the objectives pursued by the High Authority by means of financial arrangements under Article 53 are contrary to the objectives defined by Articles 3 and 4 of the Treaty

2. The complaint of misuse of powers with regard to Articles 53 (b), 57, 58 and 59 and Annex II to the Treaty, namely that, since the defendant has effected the allocation of ferrous scrap in the guise of a financial arrangement whilst refraining from observing the provisions of Articles 58 and 59 under the guarantees fixed in Annex II, it has committed a misuse of powers

3. The complaint of misuse of powers with regard to Articles 53 (b), 54 and 57 of the Treaty, namely that the High Authority cannot have recourse to financial arrangements under Articles 53, whilst disregarding the provisions of Article 54

4. The complaint of misuse of powers with regard to Article 65 of the Treaty, namely that by refusing to grant a reference consumption for plant and manufacturing processes put into operation after 31 January 1958 and imposing a supplementary charge on excess consumption, the High Authority adopted measures which were more restrictive than was necessary for that purpose

5. The complaint based on the infringement of Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 53, 54, 58, 59 and 65 of the Treaty and Annex II thereto

Costs