Opinion of Judge Biancarelli of the Court of First Instance delivered on 30 January 1991

1 Original language: French.

2 OJ 1980 L 291, p. 1.

3 See Dr J. F. Meinhold, Nichtigkeitsurteil, Widergutmachungsmaßnahmen und Schadensersatz gemäß Anikei 34 EGKSV', Recht der Internationalen Wirtschaft 1989, No 6.

4 OJ 1982 L 191, p. 1.

5 OJ 1983 L 177, p. 5.

6 OJ 1983 L 208, p. 1.

7 OJ 1984 L 29, p. 1.

8 OJ 1985 L 340, p. 5.

9 OJ 1987 L 136, p. 37.

10 OJ 1988 L 25, p. 1.

11 Joined Cases 14/60, 16/60, 17/60, 20/60, 24/60, 26/60, 27/60 and 1/61 Meroni et Cte and Others v High Authority [1961] ECR 161

12 Case 14/81 Alpha Steel v Commission [1982] ECR 749

13 Joined Cases 63/84 and 147/84 Fmsider v Commission [1985] ECR 2857

14 Joined Cases 140/82, 146/82, 221/82 and 226/82 Walzstahl-Vereinigung and Thyssen v Commission [1984] ECR 951

15 Case 236/86 Dillmger Hüttenwerke AG v Commission [1988] ECR 3761

16 Case 317/82 Usines Gustave Böel and Fabrique de Fer de Matibeuge v Commission [1983] ECR 2041.

17 Case 250/83 Finsider v Commission [1985] ECR 131.

18 COM(85) 509 final

19 Case 244/81 Klöckner Werke AC v Commission [1983] ECR 1451.

20 Joined Cases 218/87 and 223/87, 72/88 and 92/88 [1989] ECR 1711

21 See in that connection the judgment in Joined Cases 42/59 and 49/59 Société Nouvelle des Usines de Pontlteue, Acieries du Temple (Snupat) c High Authority [1961] ECR 53

22 Case 209/83 Ferreira Valsabbia v Commission [1984] ECR 3089.

23 Joined Cases 42 and 49/59, cuted in footnote 19, more particularly at p. 87

24 Contentieux Communautaire, published by Bruylant, Brussels, 1977, p. 217

25 Joined Cases 45/70 and 49/70 Fritz-Auguste Bode Commission [1971] ECR 465

26 Le droit de la Communaute economique europeenne. editions de l'université de Bruxelles, Vol. 10 p 175

27 Case 92/78 Simmenthal v Commission [1979] ECR 777. See also, on all these points, E. Paulis: Les effets des arrets d'annulation de la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes, Cahiers de Droit Européen, 1987, p. 243; M.-C. Bergeres: La théorie de l'inexistence en droit communautaire, Revue Trimestrielle de Droii Europeen, No 4, October-December 1989, p. 647.

28 Joined Cases 97/86, 99/86, 193/86 and 215/86 Astéris A. E. and Others and Greece v Commission [1988] ECR 2181.

29 See in particular Balentine, The Court of Justice of the European Coal and Steel Community, The Hague, 1955, p. 88; the report of Cesare Grassetti in Les Actes Officiels du Congrès International d'Etudes sur la CECA, Milan, 31 May to 9 June 1957, Milan, 1958, p. 55; J. Blancher, La concurrence du recours en annulation avec l'action en réparation des dommages, Dix Ans de la Jurisprudence de la CJCE, Cologne, 1965, p. 343 et seq.

30 Case 6/60 Humblet v Belgian State [1960] ECR 559.

31 See in thai regard the judgment of 2 June 1976 in Joined Cases 56 to 60/74 Kampffmeyer v Commission [1976] ECR 711.

32 See in that regard the judgment of 28 March 1979 in Case 90/78 Granaria v Council and Commission [1979] ECR 1081.

33 Which I have been able to consult by courtesy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg.

34 Emphasis added.

35 Meroni et Cie and Others v High Authority (above, note 10), with an Opinion by Mr Lagrange; Joined Cases 9 and 12/60 Vloeberghs, SA v High Authority [1961] ECR 197, with an Opinion by Mr Roemer.

36 Judgment of 13 June 1958 in Case 10/56 Meroni v High Authority [195S] ECR 157.

37 Sec the doctoral thesis presented by Thierry Debard at the université Jean-Moulin, Lyon III, in 1984, L'Action en Responsabilité Extracontractuelle devant ia Cour de Justice des Communautés Europeennes, p. 193 et sea. These matters were also taken up and commented on by Louis Cartou and Jean Blanchet in their work entitled Dix Ans de la Jurisprudence de la Cour de Justice des Communautés Européennes, Cologne, 1965, p 326 et seq. and p. 343 et seq.

38 Joined Cases 81/85 and 119/85 Usinor v Commission [1986] ECR 1777

39 See in that regard Goffin, JT 1963-2, p. 115. See also Much, Die Amtshaltung im Recht der Europäischen Gemeinschaft fur Kohle und Stahl, p. 56 et seq., p. 93 et seq., and p. 161, who essentially bases his analysis on the proviso concerning the first paragraph of Article 34 contained in the opening sentence of Article 40. See also Cesare Grassetti (above), who, like Much, considers that the status of lex specialis attaching to Article 34, which is moreover confirmed by the phrase Without prejudice to the first paragraph of Article 34 at the beginning of Article 40 (justifies the) conclusion that whenever the conditions of Article 34 are met the application of Article 40 is excluded'. Finally, see also the abovementioned thesis of Thierry Debard who, after long hesitation, comes to the same conclusion, taking the view that the solution arrived at in the Vloeberghs judgment (above) is confined to the facts of that case, because the applicant undertaking did not enjoy the status of an undertaking within the meaning of Article 80 of the ECSC Treaty.

40 Droit Institutionnel des Communautés Européennes, Les Cours de Droit, 1981-1982, p. 291. See also 2nd edition, 1990, p. 298.

41 See footnote 2.

42 See footnote 35.

43 J. Brcban: Revue de Droit Public, 1962 Revue de Jurisprudence de la CJCE, p. 872 et seq, particularly at pp. 1123 and 1124.

44 La Communauté Européenne du Charbon et de l'Acier, Pans. 1953, LGDJ, p 93 et seq

45 Le Droit de la Communauté Européenne du Charbon et de l'Acier — riîif Etude dei Sources, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, 1958, p. 126et seq

46 Case 1/55 Kergall v Common Assembly [1954 to 1956) ECR 151

47 Droit Communautaire Général, in Droit, Sciences Economiques, Masson, 1983, p 252 et seq

48 La Relation entre le Recours en Indemnité et le Recours en Annulation dans le Traite CECA, NJW 1961, Volume 50, p 2287.

49 Imprimerie nationale, JU 101144.

50 See, in that connection. Case 6/54 Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands v High Authority of the ECSC [1954 to 1956] ECR 103; Case 15/60 Simon v Court of Justice [1961] ECR 115; Case 39/72 Commissionn v Italian Republic [1973] ECR 101; Case 18/76 Government of the Federal Republic of Germany v Commission [1979] ECR 343 and Case 130/87 Catsse de Pensions des Employes Prives v François Retter [1989] ECR 865

51 Case 25/62 Plaumann et Cie v Commission [1963] ECR 95.

52 Case 4/69 Lütticke v Commission [1971] ECR 325.

53 Case 5/71 Schöppenstedt v Council [1971] ECR 975.

54 See to that effect, the judgments in Case 43/72 Merkur v Commission [1973] ECR 1055; Case 238/78 Irekt-Arkady v Council and Commission [1979] ECR 2965 — the Quellmehl case, with a very explicit Opinion from Mr Capotorti on that point at p. 2981, Joined Cases 261/78 and 262/78 Interquell v Council and Commission [1979] ECR 3045; Case 76/79 Karl Konecke v Commission [1980] ECR 665, Case 543/79 Anion Birke v Council [1981] ECR 2169, and Case 281/82 Société Unifrex v Commission and Council [1984] ECR 1969

55 Case 175/84 Krohn v Commission [1986] ECR 753

56 Above, p 252

57 Joined Cases 197 to 200/80, 243/80, 245/80 and 247/80 Walzmuble and Others v Council and Commission [1981] ECR 3211.

58 See, on this point, H. W Fuss. La Responsabilité des Communautés Européennes pour le Comportement Illégal de leurs Organes, Revue Trimestrielle de Drost Europeen, 1981, p. 1 ; j.-F Couzinet:La Faute dans le Régime de la Responsabilité non contractuelle des Communautés Europeennes, Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Europeen, 1986, p 367; F Schockweiler, with G Wivenes and J. M Godart Le Regime dc la Responsabilité Extracontractuelle du fait d'Actes Juridiques de la Communauté Européenne, Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Europeen, 1990, p 27

59 See, in that connection, the case-law of the Court of Justice referred to at III A 2 regarding the seriousness of the fault and at IV 1(b) regarding the nature of the harm

60 Above.

61 Above.

62 Emphasis added.

63 Above, p. 94.

64 At p. 228.

65 Sec the second subparagraph of Article 65(4) and Article 66(1). Translator's note In fact, in the English version of the Treaty, the expression used in these cases is subject to , not without prejudice to

66 See, in this connection, the second paragraph of Article 47, Article 68(1), and Article 69(1) Translator's note: The English version uses the expression subiect to , not without prejudice to

67 [1958] ECR ai pp 162 and 163

68 Walzilabl and Thynen, above.

69 Usinar, above

70 Case 143/77 Scholten-Honig v Council and Commission [1979] ECR 3583

71 See 2, below.

72 Case 23/59 FERAM v High Authority [1959] ECR 245.

73 Joined Cases 29/63, 31/63, 36/63, 39/73 to 47/63. 50/63 and 51/63 Société des Laminom, Hauti Fourneaux, Forget, Fondenes et Usines de la Providence and Others v High Authority [1965] ECR 911.

74 Joined Cases 19/60, 21/60, 2/61 and 3/61 Société Fives Lille Cail and Others v High Authority [1961] ECR 281

75 At p. 237.

76 Case 74/74 Comptoir National Technique Agricole v Commission [1975] ECR 533.

77 Joined Cases 83/76 and 94/76, 4/77, 15/77 and 40/77 Bayenscbe HNL and Others v Council and Commission [1978] ECR 1209.

78 Case 238/78 Ireks-Arkady v Council and Commission [1979] ECR 2955 and Joined Cases 261/78 and 262/78 Interquell v Council and Commission [1979] ECR 3045 (known as the Quellmchl cases).

79 Case 59/83 Biovilac v European Economic Community [1984] ECR 4057

80 Joined Cases 194/83 to 210/83 Asiens [1985] ECR 2815.

81 Case 250/83 Finsider v Commission [1985] ECR 131

82 Case 8/57 Aciéries Belga v High Authority [1957 and 1958] ECR 245; Case 13/57 Eisen-und Stahlindustrie v High Authority [1957 and 1958] ECR 265.

83 Case 9/57 Chambre Syndicale de la Sidérurgie française v High Authority [1957 and 1958] ECR 319; Cast 10/57 Aubert and Duval v High Authority [1957 and 1958J ECR 339; Case 11/57 Sociétés Electriques d'Ugìnei High Authority [1957 and 1958] ECR 357; and Case 12/57 Syndicat de la Sidérurgie du Centre-Midi v High Authority [1957 and 1958] ECR 375.

84 Joined Cases 3 to 18, 25 and 26/58 Barbara Erzbergbau AG and Others v High Authority [1960] ECR 173.

85 Case 143/77 Koninklijke Scholten-Honig v Council and Commission [1979] ECR 3583 (the Isoglucose case).

86 Above.

87 Case 244/81 Khckner v Commission [1983] ECR 1451, paragraphs 10 and 11.

88 Case 119/81 Klockner v Commission [1982] ECR 2627.

89 [1988] ECR pp. 4324 and 4325.

90 See F. A. Schockweiler: La Notion de Détournement de Pouvoir en Droit Communautaire, Actualité Juridique de Droit Administratil, 20 June 1990, p. 435.

91 See in thai connection the judgments in Case 8/55 federation Charbonnière de Belgique v High Authority [1956] ECR 245; Case 2/57 Compagnie des Haut, fourneaux de Chane v High Authority [1957 and 1958] ECR 199; and Joined Cases 3/64 and 4/64 Chambre Syndicale de la Sidérurgie Française and Others v High Authority [l965] ECR 441

92 See, under the heading Supplementary Remarks, Section XIII, last paragraph

93 Case 14/81 Alpha Steel Commission [1982] ECR 749

94 Case 250/83 Finsider v Commission [1985] ECR 131

95 Joined Cases 5/66, 7/66 and 13/66 to 24/66 Firma Kampffmeyer and Others v Commission [1967] ECR 245.

96 On this point, sec the Opinion of Mr Advocate General Capotorti in Ireki-Arkjdy, above, at p 2998

97 See in [hat regard the Order of the President of the Court of Justice of 10 August 1987 in Case 223/87 R Miider v Commission [1987] PCR 347} and the Order of the President of the Court of Justice of 2 May 1988 m Casc 92/88 R Assider v Commission [1988] ECR2425

98 See the Opinion of Mr Advocate General M. Capotorti of 12 September 1979 (at p. 3001).

99 At pp. 2998 and 2999.

100 In that respect, see the judgment in Joined Cases 27/59 and 39/59 Campolongo v High Authority [1960] ECR 391.