JUDGMENT OF 8. 4. 1976 - CASE 29/75 KAUFHOF v COMMISSION

In Case 29/75

THE COURT composed of: R. Lecourt, President, H. Kutscher and A. O'Keeffe, Presidents of Chambers, A. M. Donner, J. Mertens de Wilmars, M. Sørensen and Lord Mackenzie Stuart, Judges, Advocate-General: J.-P. Warner Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Facts

I — Facts and written procedure

II — Conclusions of the parties

III — Submissions and arguments of the parties

A — Admissibility

B — The substance of the case

Law

Costs

I —. Facts and written procedure

II —. Conclusions of the parties

1. Annul the Decision of the Commission of 20 January 1975 (75/71/EEC);

2. Order the defendant to pay the costs.

1. Dismiss the application as unfounded;

2. Order the applicant to pay the costs.

III —. Submissions and arguments of the parties

A —. Admissibility

B —. The substance of the case

1. By an application lodged at the Court Registry on 17 March 1975, the proceedings relating to which were stayed temporarily at the request of the parties, the applicant sought the annulment of the decision of the Commission of 20 January 1975(75/71/EEC) authorizing the Federal Republic of Germany not to apply Community treatment to preparations and preserves of beans in pod coming under subheading 20.02 ex G of the Common Customs Tariff, originating in the People's Republic of China and put into free circulation in the other Member States, in respect of which applications for import authorizations were made after 1 January 1975.

2. On 2 January 1975 the applicant made a request to the Bundesamt für Ernährung und Forstwirtschaft (Federal Office for Food and Forestry) for an import authorization in respect of 5000 boxes of the said preserves, which had been put into free circulation in the Netherlands.

3. On the basis of that request, the defendant, by a decision of 20 January 1975, authorized the Federal Republic of Germany not to apply Community treatment to the products in question.

4. The latter complains that the defendant has exceeded its powers under Article 115 of the EEC Treaty and thus violated the principle of the proportionality of administrative measures.

5. As from 1 July 1968, the date of the entry into force of Regulation (EEC) No 865/68 of the Council (OJ English Special Edition 1968 (I), p. 225), any quantitative restriction or measure having equivalent effect relating to the products in question is prohibited in the internal trade of the Community.

6. It appears from the statements made by the defendant's Agent during the oral proceedings that it considers that the authorization requested should be granted if the measure of commercial policy adopted by the Member State concerned is compatible with the Treaty, without having to take account of the reasons on which that measure is based, and, when it involves an absolute prohibition on imports, without having to take account of the quantity, whether large or negligible, concerned in the applications already received.

7. Under Article 69 (2) of the Rules of Procedure the unsuccessful party shall be ordered to pay the costs if they have been asked for.

On those grounds, THE COURT hereby rules:

1 The decision of the Commission of 20 January 1975 authorizing the Federal Republic of Germany not to apply Community treatment to certain products originating in the People's Republic of China and put into free circulation in the Netherlands, is annulled to the extent to which it concerns products in respect of which applications for licences were pending before the German administration when the application for authorization was lodged.

2 The defendant is ordered to bear the costs.