Opinion of Mr Advocate General Gulmann delivered on 15 July 1993

1 Original language: Danish.

2 Decision 83/396/ECSC concerning the aids that the Italian Government proposes to grant to certain steel undertakings, OJ 1983 L 227. p. 24. The Court has jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings on the interpretation of ECSC measures, sec judgment in Case C-221/88 Bussan [1990] ECR I-495.

3 OJ 1981 L 228. p. 14.

4 In its judgment in Case 304/85 Falck v Commission [1987] ECR 871, the Court held that the Commission cannot approve aid the grant of which may result in manifest discrimination between the public and private sectors (paragraph 27).

5 The Commission and the Italian Government have referred to the fact that in the disputed provision there is a comma before dal marzo 1981 sino al 31 dicembre 1982 and contended that that comma shows that the said period is linked to the words increases in the electricity surcharge and not to the words decided by the Interministerial Committee. That argument cannot, in ray opinion, be accorded great significance. On the one hand it seems dubious to me whether the position of a comma can support the interpretation claimed and, on the other hand, arguments supported by the placing of a comma can generally be accorded relatively limited significance. Moreover, that the argument is dubious would seem to be borne out by the fact that the Consiglio di Stato, in its order for reference, found the said period, regardless of the comma, to be referred to incidentally in the provision, with no logical link to any of the foregoing phrases.