Opinion of Advocate General Tesauro delivered on 23 February 1994

1 Original language: Italian.

2 OJ 1978 L 264. p. 1.

3 Moniteur Beige, 1 April 1987, p. 4832.

4 Moniteur Belge, 1 August 1991, p. 16951.

5 See codified version in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2001 of 2 June 1983 (OJ 1983 L 230, p. 6).

6 It is perhaps worth pointing out that that accident was re-cognized as occurring at the workplace by a judgment of the Cour du Travail (Higher Labour Court), Liège, and that it is merely a question of determining the extent of the physical loss sustained and the amount of compensation in respect thereof.

7 Case C-18/90 Kziber [1991] ECR I-199.

8 See, for example, De Winter, Direct applicability and direct effect: two distinct and different concepts in Community law, CMLR, 1972, pp. 425, and Luzzato, La diretta applicabilità nel diritto comunitario, Milan 1980, particularly pp. 32; and Joliet, Le droit institutionnel des Communautés européennes, Liège, 1983, pp. 142.

9 For example, in the Kziber judgment, and thus specifically in relation to Article 41(1) of the Cooperation Agreement, the Court with detached indifference uses both direct effect and direct applicability.

10 Exchange of letters annexed to the Cooperation Agreement (OJ 1978 L 264, p. 114).

11 Exchange of letters appended to the Cooperation Agreement (OJ 1978 L 264, p. 114).

12 OJ 1992 L 136, p. 1.

13 See, most recently, the judgment in Case C-310/91 Schmid [1993] ECR I-3011, paragraph 10. The first affirmation to that effect is to be found already in the judgment in Case 187/73 Callemcyn [1974] ECR 553, paragraph 15.

14 See Callemeyn judgment cited above, paragraphs 7 and 8.

15 Judgment in Case C-356/89 Newton [1991] ECR I-3017, paragraph 15. See also to the same effect the Callemeyn judgment, cited above, at paragraph 11.