lagen.
EU-domstolen

Opinion of Advocate General Gulmann delivered on 12 May 1992

CELEX
61989CC0280
Typ
EU-domstolen

Källa

1 Original language: Danish.

2 As regards the British rules, see the judgments in Case C-3/87 The Queen v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Agegate [1989] ECR 4459, Case C-216/87 The Queen v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Jaderow [1989] ECR 4509, Case C-221/89 The Queen v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd [1991] ECR I-3905, and Case C-246/89 Commission v United Kingdom [1991] ECR I-4585. As regards the Irish rules, see the judgments in Case 223/86 Pesca Valentia [1988] ECR 83, and Case C-93/89 Commission v Ireland [1991] ECR I-4569.

3 See footnote 1.

4 OJ 1976 L 20, p. 19.

5 OJ 1981 L 379, p. 1.

6 The Commission states that a British-registered vessel must be assimilated to British territory. In support of that view it relies on Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 802/68 of the Council of 27 June 1968 on the common definition of the concept of origin of goods (OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (I), p. 165), according to which products of sea fishing and other products which are taken from the sea by vessels of a country are regarded as originating in that country, and also on the judgment of the Court in Case 100/84 Commission v United Kingdom [1985] ECR 1169.

7 That assessment is contained in a letter oí 6 February 1984 from the Commission to the Irish Government in vhich the Commission set out the outcome of its examination of the draft Fisheries (Amendment) Act. The relevant passage in the letter is as follows:... The Commission understands that the Sea Fishing Boats Regulations 1983 prohibit only the use of certain British vessels for which the United Kingdom itself has restricted fishing jn its own waters and has no objection against the Regulation.

8 United Nations Treaties Series 450, No 6465.

9 I would here refer to the Opinion of Advocate General Tesauro in Case C-286/90 Poulsen, delivered on 31 March 1992, from which it is apparent that the objection raised by Ireland could also be rejected on the grounds that it is not supported by the applicable rules of public international law.

10 According to the information given, this was because an Irish court suspended the application of the rules on the grounds of the doubts as to their compatibility with Community law.

11 See, for example, the judgment of the Court of 18 March 1992 in Case C-29/90 Commission v Greece [1992] ECR I-1971.