Opinion of Mr Advocate General Darmon

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

1. The relevant facts which underlie this reference for a preliminary ruling made by the Supreme Court, Dublin, are as follows.

2. Observations were submitted to the Court not only by the appellant and the respondent in the main proceedings, that is, Fearon and the Irish Land Commission, but also by Ireland and the Commission.

3. According to Fearon, that legislation is discriminatory, contrary to the principle of proportionality and a source of legal uncertainty. In addition, according to Fearon, the discussion before this Court should not be limited to the interpretation of Article 58 of the Treaty and the Supreme Court, instead of holding that Section 35 of the Land Act 1965 was not incompatible with Articles 40 and 52 of the Treaty, should have referred to this Court the questions raised before it by Fearon concerning those two articles.

4. With regard to the complaint of discrimination, Fearon contends that Article 58 requires the Member States to grant the right of establishment, conferred on natural persons by Article 52, to companies, as defined by the second paragraph of Article 58.

5. The complaints based on a breach of the principles of proportionality and legal certainty also appear to have little merit. Those principles cannot be interpreted as prohibiting the national legislature from laying down, on a basis which does not involve discrimination on grounds of nationality, rules for compulsory acquisition such as those introduced by Section 35 of the Land Act 1965.

6. There remains the reference to Article 40.

7. In conclusion therefore I suggest that the Court should rule that:

1 Translated from the French.

2 Opinion in Case 44/79 Hauer v Land Rheinland-Platz [1979] ECR 3759 to 3760.