Opinion of Mr Advocate General Darmon delivered on 5 March 1991

1 Original language: French.

2 OJ 1983 L 230, p 6.

3 Paragraph 2 of the reference for a preliminary ruling.

4 Written observations, paragraph 6.

5 Judgment of 17 June 1975 in Case 7/75 Mr and Mrs F. v Belgian Slate [1975] ECR 679, at paragraph 10.

6 Written observations, paragraph 4.6.

7 Judgment of 29 November 1977 in Case 35/77 Beerens v Rijksdienst voor Arbeidsvoorziening [1977] ECR 2249, at p. 2255 (operative part).

8 Judgment of 27 January 1981 in Case 70/80 Vigier v Bundesversicherungsanstalt får Angestellte [1981] ECR 229, at paragraph 15.

9 Judgment of 6 July 1978 in Case 9/78 Directeur Regional de la Sécurité Sociale de Nancy w Cillard [1978] ECR 1661, ai paragraph 12; and judgment of 5 May 1983 in Case 139/82 Pisatelia v INPS (1983] ECR 1427, at paragraph 10

10 Judgment of 24 February 1987 in Joined Cases 379 to 381/85 and 93/86 CRAM Rhõne-Alpes v Giletti [1987] ECR 955, at paragraph 9; see also the judgment of 22 lune 1972 in Case 1/72 Frilli v Belgium [1972] ECR 457, at paragraph 13; judgment of 28 May 1974 in Case 187/73 Callemeyn v Belgium [1974] ECR 553, at paragraph 6; judgment of 9 October 1974 in Case 24/74 CRAM v Baison [1974] ECR 999, at paragraph 9.

11 Written observations, paragraph 9.

12 See the Callemeyn judgment, cited above, at paragraph 7, and the judgment of 13 November 1974 in Case 39/74 Cojrav Belgium [1974] ECR 1251, at paragraph 7

13 Paragraph 8 of the reference for a preliminary ruling, emphasis added.

14 See Giletti, cited above, at paragraph 7.

15 Written observations, paragraph 4.6.

16 See Costa v Belgium, cited above, at paragraph 10.

17 Written observations, paragraph 4.6.

18 See Callemeyn v Belgium, cited above, at paragraph 11; and Giletti, cited above, at paragraph 11.

19 See Costa v Belgium, cited above, at paragraph 11.

20 See the Piscitello judgment, cited above, at paragraph 15; see also the ludgmenl of 7 November 1973 m Case 51/73 Sonale Verzekeringsbank v Smieja [1973] ECR 1213, at paragraph 20; and the Giletti judgment, cited above, at paragraph 14.

21 Written observations, paragraph 10.

22 Written observations, paragraphs 5.5 and 5.6.

23 See the Giletti judgment, cited above, at paragraph 15; see also the judgment of 10 June 1982 in Case 92/81 Camera v INAMI [1982] ECR 2213, at paragraph 14, judgment of 23 October 1986 in Case 300/84 Van Roosmalen v Bestuur van de Bedrijfsvereniging voor de Gezondheid [1986] ECR 3097, at paragraph 39.

24 Cited above, at paragraph 16.

25 OJ 1985 C 240, p. 6.

26 Judgment of 12 July 1990 in Case 236/88 Commission v France [1990] ECR 3163, at paragraph 19.

27 Written observations, paragraph 18.

28 See also the Belgian Government's position, in its written observations at paragraph 2.3.

29 See the Gilett i judgment, cited above, at paragraph 16.

30 Cited in footnote 22.

31 Sec the Piscitello judgment, cited above, at paragraph 15, emphasis added

32 Cited above.

33 See the Opinion of Mr Advocate General Mancini, at paragraph 7.

34 Paragraph 7 of the reference for a preliminary ruling.