Opinion of Mr Advocate General Darmon delivered on 14 November 1984

1 Translated from the French.

2 The so-called maize cases: Case 4/79 Providence Agricole de la Champagne v ONIC [1980] ECR 2823; Case 109/79 Matsenes de Seance v ONIC [1980] ECR 2883; Case 145/79 Roquette frères v French Customs Administration [1980] ECR 2917 and the Opinion of Mr Advocate General Mayras at [1980] ECR 2855.

3 Judgment of 8 April 1976 in Case 43/75 [1976] ECR 455.

4 Judgment of 13 May 1981 in Case 66/80 [1981] ECR 1191.

5 Case 101/78, Granaria v Hoofdproduktschap voor Akkerbonwprodukten [1979] ECR 623, paragraphs 4 to 5.

6 Case 23/75 Rey Soda v Cassa Conguaglio Zucchero [1975] ECR 1279, paragraph 51.

7 Case 33/76, Rewe-Zentral v Landwirtschaftskammer Saarland [1976] ECR 1989, paragraph 5.

8 Case 26/74, Roquette Frères v Comminimi [1976] ECR 677, paragraphs 9 to 11.

9 Case 265/78 Ferwerda v Produktschap voor Vee en Vlees [1980] ECR 617, paragraphs 10 and 12; Casc 130/79, Express Dairy Foods v Intervention Board for Agricultural Product [WW] ECR 1887, paragraph 12.

10 See [he Opinion of Mr Advocate General Capotorti in the Express Dairy Foods case, referred to above, at pp. 1908 to 1910, and the judgments referred to.

11 Case 130/79, referred to above, at paragraphs 10 and 11.

12 Case 130/79, referred to above, at paragraph 12.

13 Case 166/73, Rheinmühlen v Einfuhr- und Vorratstelle Getreide [1974] ECR 33, paragraph 2.

14 Judgment of 13 May 1981 in Case 66/80 [1981] ECR 1191, paragraphs 12 to 14.

15 Joined Cases 117/76 and 16/77, Ruckdeschel v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-St Annen [1977] ECR 1753, paragraphs 11 to 13.

16 Case 166/73, referred to above, at the second subparagraph of paragraph 2.

17 Case 61/69 Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Denkavit Italiana [1980] ECR 1205 at paragraph 16; sec also Joined Cases 66, 127 and 128/79 Salumi [1980] ECR 1237 at paragraphs 7 to 9, Case 811/79, Ariele[m0] ECR 2545 at paragraphs 5 and 6, and the judgment of 13 December 1983 in Case 222/82, Apple and Pear Development Council v Lewis [1983] ECR 4083 at paragraph 38.

18 Joined Cases 117/76 and 16/77, Joined Cases 124/76 and 20/77 and Joined Cases 64 and 113/76; Opinion of Mr Advocate General Capotorti in Joined Cases 117/76 and 16/77 Ruckdeschel [1977] ECR 1753 at pp. 1786 to 1787 and 1791 to 1792.

19 Judgments of 4 October 1979 in Joined Cases 64 and 113/76, 167 and 239/78, 27, 28 and 45/79, Joined Cases [1979] ECR 2955, et sem sec also the Opinion of Mr Advocate General Reischl in Case 66/80, referred to above, at p. 1229.

20 Case 238/78 Ireks-Arkady v Council and Commission [1979] ECR 2955, Opinion of Mr Advocate General Capotorti at p. 2911.

21 See in particular Case 238/78, supra, at p. 2975, point 1 of the operative part, and the judgment of 13 November 1984 in Joined Cases 256, 257, 265 and 267/80, 5 and 51/81 and 282/82 Birra Würer [1984] ECR 3693 at point 2 of the operative part.

22 Case 131/77, [1978] ECR 1041.

23 Case 130/79, referred to above, at paragraph 8, and the Opinion in that case at p. 1905 el seq.

24 Case 66/80, referred to above, where the Court also had occasion to consider the effects of an invalidated regulation as it applied before it was declared to be void (paragraph 22).

25 Case 43/75, referred to above, at paragraph 75.

26 Case 43/75, referred to above, paragraphs 71 to 74.

27 Case 61/79, referred to above, paragraph 17.

28 Case 811/79, referred to above, paragraphs 7 and 8; sec also Case 128/79, referred to above, paragraphs 10 and 12 and Case 61/79, referred to above, paragraph 18.

29 Sec in particular the Opinion of Mr Advocate General Reischl in Case 66/80, referred to above, at pp. 1227 to 1230.

30 Ibid, p. 1236.

31 Case 61/79, referred to above, paragraph 17.

32 Case 43/75, referred to above, paragraph 74.

33 Case 130/79, referred to above, paragraphs 13 and 14.