JUDGMENT OF 9.6.1964 — JOINED CASES 55 TO 59/63 AND 61 TO 63/63 MODENA v HIGH AUTHORITY
In Joined Cases 55 to 59/63 and 61 to 63/63
THE COURT composed of: A. M. Donner, President; Ch. L. Hammes and A. Trabucchi, Presidents of Chambers, L. Delvaux, R. Rossi (Rapporteur), R. Lecourt and W. Strauß, Judges, Advocate-General: K. Roemer 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
Admissibility
A — The applications for annulment
1. The letter of 8 April 1963
2. Decision No 7/63
B — Claims for compensation in Cases 55, 56, 58, 59, 61, 62 and 63/63
On the substance
A — Application for annulment
1. Misuse of powers
2. Infringement of the Treaties or of any rules of law relating to their application, of the decisions introducing the ferrous scrap equalization scheme and of the principles governing the latter
3. Absence of reasons
4. Infringement of the law: incompatibility with Community rules relating to publication of prices
5. Infringement of the law: incompatibility with Community rules concerning competition
6. Misuse of powers: inaccurate recital of the facts and incorrect determination of the amounts of ferrous scrap chargeable
B — Claim for damages
IV — Procedure
Grounds of judgment
A — The application for annulment
1. Decision No 7/63
Admissibility
2. The letters of 8 April 1963
Admissibility
B — The claim for damages
Costs
I —. Facts
II —. Conclusions of the parties
(a). To order production of all the documents concerning the declarations, calculations and checks, and the documents relating to purchases of ferrous scrap by the applicant which are in the possession of the High Authority and also the reports of the various checks carried out by the Société Fiduciaire Suisse;
b). To admit production of the exhibits as annexes to the pleadings;
(c). To hear, if necessary, the evidence of the following persons: Luciano Gerini, of 24 Piazza Stazione, Bordighera, to verify the declarations in annex No 2; Augusto Caramalli of 93 Via Bagnoli, Pozzuoli, Emilio Scarpellino, of 101 Via Napoli, Pozzuoli, and Vitale Jovino, of 5 Via Pisciarelli, Pozzuoli, to verify the declarations in the legal attestation (annex No 3);
(d). To order the High Authority to produce particulars of the amounts improperly paid which are mentioned in the statement of account because they have not been recovered, and also all the figures upon which Decision No 7/63 is based.
A —. In the first place:
B —. Alternatively
C —. By way of an interlocutory order to suspend in the circumstances the application of the contested Decision to the applicant company in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 39; To order the High Authority to pay the costs; subject to the right to apply for an order that experts' reports be obtained.
(a). In Case 57/63
b). In the other cases
III —. Submissions and arguments of the parties
A —. The applications for annulment
1. The letter of 8 April 1963
2. Decision No 7/63
B —. Claims for compensation in Cases 55, 56, 58, 59, 61, 62 and 63/63
A —. Application for annulment
1. Misuse of powers
2. Infringement of the Treaties or of any rules of law relating to their application, of the decisions introducing the ferrous scrap equalization scheme and of the principles governing the latter
3. Absence of reasons
4. Infringement of the law: incompatibility with Community rules relating to publication of prices
5. Infringement of the law: incompatibility with Community rules concerning competition
6. Misuse of powers: inaccurate recital of the facts and incorrect determination of the amounts of ferrous scrap chargeable
B —. Claim for damages
IV —. Procedure
A —. The application for annulment
1. Decision No 7/63
(a). The defendant submits that Decision No 7/63 is a general decision and can therefore only be contested by the applicants if they can make out a prima facie case of misuse of powers affecting them.
(b). Under the second paragraph of Article 33 of the Treaty an application brought by undertakings against a general Decision of the High Authority is only admissible if they can make out a prima facie case of a misuse of powers affecting them. Therefore the grounds other than misuse of powers, put forward in this case by the applicants, are inadmissible.
2. The letters of 8 April 1963
B —. The claim for damages
On these grounds, Upon reading the pleadings; Upon reading the report of the Judge-Rapporteur; Upon hearing the parties; Upon hearing the opinion of the Advocate-General; Having regard to Articles 14, 15, the first and second paragraphs of Article 33 and to Article 40 of the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community; Having regard to the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community; Having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, especially the first paragraph of Article 69 (3), THE COURT hereby:
1 Dismisses the applications as inadmissible to the extent to which they seek the annulment of Decision No 7/63 and of the letters of 8 April 1963;
2 Dismisses the applications as unfounded to the extent to which they seek payment of damages;
3 Orders each party to bear its own costs.