EU-domstolen

JUDGMENT OF 5. 12. 1979 — CASE 143/77 KONINKLIJKE SCHOLTEN-HONIG v COUNCIL AND COMMISSION

CELEX: 61977CJ0143
Typ: EU-domstolen

In Case 143/77,

THE COURT composed of: H. Kutscher, President, A. O'Keeffe and A. Touffait (Presidents of Chambers), J. Mertens de Wilmars, Lord Mackenzie Stuart, G. Bosco and T. Koopmans, Judges, Advocate General: G. Reischl Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Facts and Issues

I — Facts and procedure

1. The product at issue

2. Community legislation

3. The applications

(a) In Cases 116/77 and 143/77

(b) In Case 124/77

II — Conclusions of the parties

Alternatively

III — Submissions and arguments of the parties

— Breach of a superior rule of law for the protection of the individual

1. The prohibition on any discrimination between producers within the Community (second subparagraph of Article 40 (3) of the Treaty)

2. The obligation to take account of the objectives set out in Article 39 (1) of the Treaty in laying down rules for the common organization of the agricultural market

3. Violation of the principle of proportionality

4. Principle of legal certainty

5. The right of freedom to trade and pursue other business activities

— Assessment of the damage

— Causal connexion between the regulations in dispute and the damage suffered

— Damage and causal nexus

— Damages claimed by the applicant in this application

— Breach of a superior rule of law

1. Discrimination

2. Disregard of the objectives in Article 39 of the Treaty and of the principle of proportionality

3. Violation of legal certainty

4. Violation of the principle of freedom to pursue trade and business activities

1. Infringement of the prohibition on discrimination (second subparagraph of Article 40 (3) of the Treaty)

2. Violation of the principle of proportionality

D — The applicant's reply

1. Infringement of Article 39 of the Treaty

2. Violation of the principle of nondiscrimination

3. Violation of the principle of proportionality

E — The Council's rejoinder relating to Joined Cases 116/77, 124/77 and 143/77

— Causal nexus

— Serious breach of a superior rule of law

1. Potential production of isoglucose and the extent to which that product may he substituted for sugar

2. The question of acquired rights to continuance of regulations

3. Infringement of Article 39 of the Treaty

4. The complaints of discrimination, disproportionality and misuse of powers

6. Violation of legal certainty by the absence of transitional measures

F — The Commission's rejoinder relating to the three cases

— Facts

1. Extent to which isoglucose may be substituted for sugar

2. Production costs

3. Raw materials

— Law

1. Violation of the principle of nondiscrimination

2. Violation of the principle of proportionality

IV — Questions put by the Court

First question (to the Council and the Commission):

The Council's answer

The Commissions's answer

Second question (to the Council and the Commission):

The Council's answer

The Commission's answer

Third Question (to the Council):

The Council's answer

Request for additional information addressed to the Commission

The Commission's answers

Points 1 and 3

Point 2

Point 4

Supplementary question put to the Commission

The Commission's answer

V — Further procedure in cases 116, 124 and 143/77 and related events

A — Oral procedure

B — Requests submitted after the closure of the oral procedure

C — The Judgment of the Court of 25 October 1978 in Joined Cases 103 and 145/77

D — Resumption of the written procedure in Joined Cases 116, 124 and 143/77 and disjoinder of Case 143/77

E — Re-opening of the oral procedure

VI — Conclusions of the parties

VII — Summary of the observations of the parties

1. Must the losses suffered by the applicant be charged to the Community under Article 215 of the Treaty?

2. The causal connexion between losses suffered by the applicant and the actions of the Community

3. The applicant's damage

B— Observations of the Commission

1. Admissibility of the applicant's supplementary observations

2. The limits of the Community's liability

3. Causal connexion between the illegal act and the damage suffered

4. The evalutation of the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant

2. Future results at Tilbury.

C — Observations of the Council

1. Introduction

2. Manifest and grave disregard of the limits on the exercise of powers

As to Point (i)

As to Point (ii)

Economic impact of the levy of 5 units of account

3. Causal connexion

4. Specific arguments to the effect that the applicant's claim for damages is unfounded