Opinion of Mr Advocate General Mischo delivered on 18 September 1990

1 Original language: French.

2 The following extracts are taken from p. 14 of the Commission's reply.

3 See the judgments in Case 78/76 Steinike v Germany [1977] ECR 595, at p. 614, and in Case 27/67 Fink-Fruét v Hauptzollamt Müncben-Landsberger Straße [1968] ECR 223.

4 Emphasized in the original.

5 Vehicles of 1000 cc: 88%; vehicles of 1600 cc: 166%; vehicles of 1800 cc: 187.2%; vehicles of 1900 cc: 288.8%; vehicles of 2632 cc: 400%.

6 Judgment in Case 319/81 Comminion v Italy [1983] ECR 601, at p. 620.

7 Sec the judgment in Case 74/76 lannelli v Meroni [1977] ECR 557, at p. 578, paragraph 21.

8 See the judgment in Case 20/76 Schöttle v Finanzamt Freudenstadl [1977] ECR 247, at p. 260, paragraph 20.

9 See the judgment in Case 356/85 Commission v Belgium [1987] ECR 3299, at p. 3325, paragraph 15.

10 See the judgment in Case 170/78 Commission v United Kingdom [1980] ECR 417, at p. 433, paragraph 10.