Opinion of Mr Advocate General VerLoren van Themaat delivered on 22 November 1983

1 Translated from the Dutch.

2 In this opinion I have adopted the terms single-product undertakings and integrated undertakings used by the Commission. It would in fact be more accurate in this context to describe the second group of undertakings as producers with a diversified production programme.

3 Joined Cases 275/80 and 24/81, Krupp Stahl AG ν Commission, [1981] ECR 2498; Case 154/78 etc., Valsabbia and Others ν Commission, [1980] ECR 907; Case 14/81, Alpha Steel Limited v Commission [1982] ECR 749; and Joined Cases 39, 43, 85 and 88/81, Halyvourgiki ν Commission, [1982] ECR 593. For the arguments which the Walzstahl-Vereinigung bases inter alia on those decisions, I refer in particular to pages 4 to 9 of its application.

4 At the hearing lengthy argument was devoted to the question of how much lhe single-product undertakings' market share was increased. According to my calculations, the increase is less than the 5% alleged by the applicants. If wc assume that in the relevant reference period those undertakings had a market share of 70% and thus produced 70 production units, under the decision their production will be 33% less, which is 46.9 production units. The other undertakings (which originally had a market share of 30%) may produce 18.6 units after application of the higher abatement rate of 38%. Of the resultant total possible production of 65.5 units the single-product undertakings' share is 71.6% and the other producers' share 28.4%. The single-product undertakings' gain in relation to their starting position is thus no more than 3.2%. Owing to the individual quota increases granted under Article M of the decision, the gain resulting from the contested decision is, of course, still lower.

5 In a lecture delivered in Ghent on 12 December 1980 the President of the Court cited Article 8 of Decision No. 2794/80/ECSC as a typical example of State intervention consistent with the nature of a real market. See J. Mertens de Wilmars, Recht voor morgen, p. 77, Note 5 (Kluwer-Antwerp, 1983).