JUDGMENT OF 29.3. 1979 — CASE 118/78 MEIJER v DEPARTMENT OF TRADE
In Case 118/78, REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court, London, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
THE COURT composed of: H. Kutscher, President, J. Mertens de Wilmars and Lord Mackenzie Stuart (Presidents of Chambers), A. M. Donner, P. Pescatore, M. Sørensen, A. O'Keeffe, G. Bosco and A. Touffait, Judges, Advocate General: H. Mayras Registrar: A. Van Houtte
gives the following
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT
Facts and Issues
I — Facts and procedure
II — Summary of the written observations submitted to the Court
(a) Observations of Meijer B.V.
(b) Observations of the Netherlands Government
(c) Observations of the French Government
(d) Statement of case of the British Government
(e) Observations of the Commission of the European Communities
III — Oral procedure
Decision
Costs
I —. Facts and procedure
1. Potatoes are included amongst the agricultural products listed in Annex II to the EEC Treaty but are not yet covered by a common organization of the market. In January 1976 the Commission submitted a proposal for a common organization of the market (Official Journal C 61, p. 76) but the proposal is still being considered by the Council. At the present time potatoes are subject to national legislation in the individual Member States.
2. In the United Kingdom there exists a system for regulating the market in potatoes which comprises, amongst other features, controls on the import and export of main-crop potatoes (also known as ware potatoes). These controls are implemented by a system of licences operated by the Department of Trade under powers derived ultimately from the Import, Export and Customs Powers (Defence) Act 1939. The Ministry of Agriculture keeps the public informed by regular press notices whether and in what circumstances such licences will be granted.
3. The relevant provisions of the Act of Accession are Articles 9, 42 and 60. Article 9 provides:
4. The order for reference, dated 12 April 1978, was lodged at the Court Registry on 19 May 1978.
II —. Summary of the written observations submitted to the Court
(a). Observations of Meijer B.V.
(b). Observations of the Netherlands Government
(c). Observations of the French Government
(d). Statement of case of the British Government
(e). Observations of the Commission of the European Communities
III —. Oral procedure
1. By an order of 12 April 1978, which was received at the Court Registry on 19 May 1978, the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court, referred to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 177 of the EEC Treaty a question relating to the interpretation of Article 60 (2) of the Act concerning the Conditions of Accession and the Adjustments to the Treaties annexed to the Treaty of 22 January 1972 concerning the accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the European Economic Community and to the European Atomic Energy Community (hereinafter referred to as the Act of Accession).
2. The question was raised in the context of a dispute between a Netherlands company which exported potatoes and the competent authorities in the United Kingdom and it relates to the refusal of the latter authorities to permit the entry of a consignment of potatoes which arrived at Great Yarmouth on 6 January 1978.
3. The plaintiff in the main action sought a declaration from the national court to the effect that the United Kingdom is not since 1 January 1978 entitled to prohibit the importation of potatoes from Member States of the European Economic Community whilst the defendants relied on Article 60 (2) of the Act of Accession; the national court therefore asked the Court of Justice to give a preliminary ruling on the following question:
4. The measures to which the national court refers have formed the subject of proceedings under Article 169 of the EEC Treaty brought by the Commission in Case 231/78 against the United Kingdom for failure to fulfil its obligations.
5. In substance the legal question examined in the context of Case 231/78 is identical to that raised by the question from the High Court of Justice.
6. By judgment delivered this day the Court of Justice has ruled that, by not repealing or amending before the end of 1977 the provisions of its national law which have the effect of restricting imports of potatoes, the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty.
7. It is sufficient therefore to refer to the judgment in Case 231/78 the text of which is annexed to this judgment (see p. 1447).
8. Taking account of the grounds referred to in that judgment the question put by the High Court of Justice may be answered to the effect that Article 60 (2) of the Act of Accession cannot be regarded as a special provision within the meaning of the reservation set out in Article 9 (2) of that Act with the result that by virtue of the latter provision its application terminated at the end of 1977.
9. The costs incurred by the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Government of the French Republic, the Government of the United Kingdom and the Commission of the European Communities, which have submitted observations to the Court, are not recoverable.
10. As these proceedings are, in so far as the parties to the main action are concerned, in the nature of a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision as to costs is a matter for that court.
On those grounds, THE COURT, in answer to the question referred to it by the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court, by order of 12 April 1978, hereby rules: