Opinion of Advocate General Darmon delivered on 14 July 1993

1 Original language: French.

2 Supplement to Gazzetta Ufficiale No 356, 29.12.1984.

3 OJ 1991 L 283, p. 20.

4 Third recital of the Decision.

5 Ibid., Article 2.

6 Case 25/63 [1963] LCR 95.

7 Ibid., pp 106 and 107

8 Src also Casc 730/79 Philip Morris v Commission [1980] ECR 2671, at paragraph 5.

9 P. 107.

10 Ibid.

11 Ibid.

12 Philip Morris Holland v Commission (cited above) at paragraph 5. See also Cases 296/82 and 318/82 Pays-Bas and Leeuwarder Papierwarenfabriek v Commission [1985] ECR 809.

13 Joined Cases 67/85, 68/85 and 70/85 Van der Kooy and Others v Commission [1988] ECR 219, at paragraph 12.

14 Case 97/85 [1987] F.CR 2265.

15 At paragraph 11.

16 Cases 106/63 and 107/63 [1965) ECR 405.

17 Ibid. p. 407.

18 Ibid. p. 411; the emphasis is mine.

19 Case 62/70 [1971] ECR 897.

20 Ibid. ECR 899.

21 Ibid. para. 10; the emphasis is mine.

22 Case 11/82 Ptraila Patrath [1985] ECR 207,

23 Ibid. para. 31

24 Case 231/82 (1983: ECR 2559.

25 At paragraph 9

26 At paragraph 10.

27 Commission observations on the objection of inadmissibility, p. 4 of the French translation.

28 See the observations of the region of Sardinia on the list of the aid beneficiaries, p. 3 of the French translation.

29 Joined Cases C-232/91 and C-233/91 Petridi and Another v Commission [1991] ECR I-5351, para. 10.

30 Sec the Opinion of Advocate General Mancini in Dsfi (cited below) at p. 2473; the emphasis is mine.

31 Cases 16/62 and 17/62 Confédération National des Producteurs de Fruits et Légumes v Council [1962] ECR 471 at 479 480.

32 Ibid., and Casc 282/85 Defi v Commission [1986] ECR 2469, at paragraph 16