JUDGMENT OF 17. 12. 1959 — CASE 23/59 FERAM v HIGH AUTHORITY

In Case 23/59

THE COURT composed of: A. M. Donner, President, R. Rossi, President of Chamber, O. Riese (Rapporteur), Ch. L. Hammes and N. Catalano, Judges, Advocate-General: M. Lagrange Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Issues of fact and of law

I — Facts

II — Conclusions of the parties

III — Submissions and arguments of the parties

1. Submissions and arguments of the applicant

2. Submissions and arguments of the defendant

IV — Procedure

Grounds of judgment

I— Existence of in jury

II — Obligation to make good the injury

1. Liability of the High Authority on the basis of a guarantee given by it

2. Liability for a wrongful act or omission

Costs

I —. Facts

II —. Conclusions of the parties

1. Declare the application to be admissible;

2. Declare that the High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community is liable for having failed to avoid the situation whereby, during the period from 1954 to 1957, considerable quantities of ferrous scrap were sold through the OCCF, supported by fraudulent certificates issued by the Head of the Iron and Steel Department of the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs, to the effect that these quantities originated from ship-breakers' yards;

3. Instruct an expert, to be appointed by the Court, to determine:

4. Order the High Authority to pay the costs.

III —. Submissions and arguments of the parties

1. Submissions and arguments of the applicant

(a). There has been a wrongful act or omission on the part of the High Authority in the performance of its functions;

(b). The applicant has as a result suffered injury;

(c). The High Authority must therefore make reparation for it.

2. Submissions and arguments of the defendant

IV —. Procedure

I—. Existence of in jury

II —. Obligation to make good the injury

1. Liability of the High Authority on the basis of a guarantee given by it

2. Liability for a wrongful act or omission

(a). The official of the Netherlands Ministry for Economic Affairs, who fraudulently issued the certificates in question, was not subject to the control of the High Authority and did not receive orders from it, but acted in his capacity as a national official.

(b). It is also necessary however to consider whether there was a wrongful act or omission on the part of the defendant within the meaning of Article 40 of the ECSC Treaty, because of its failure to provide a better organized system for issuing the certificates of origin for ferrous scrap qualifying for equalization payments, and in particular because of its failure to provide for the investigation of the authenticity of the said certificates.

Upon reading the pleadings; Upon hearing the report of the Judge-Rapporteur; Upon hearing the parties; Upon hearing the opinion of the Advocate-General; Having regard to Article 40 of the ECSC Treaty; Having regard to the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Coal and Steel Community; Having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, especially Article 69 (2), THE COURT hereby:

1 Dismisses the application as being unfounded;

2 Orders the applicant to pay the costs.