Avis juridique important

61981O0041

European Court reports 1981 Page 00841

Parties

IN CASE 41/81 R

METALLURGIKI HALYPS SA , ATHENS , REPRESENTED BY A . ELVINGER , OF THE LUXEMBOURG BAR , AND A . LYKOUREZOS , OF THE ATHENS BAR , WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF MESSRS ELVINGER & HOSS , 15 COTE D ' EICH ,

APPLICANT ,

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES , REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL ADVISER , M . VAN ACKERE , ASSISTED BY F . BENYON , A MEMBER OF ITS LEGAL DEPARTMENT , WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE OFFICE OF O . MONTALTO , A MEMBER OF ITS LEGAL DEPARTMENT , JEAN MONNET BUILDING , KIRCHBERG ,

DEFENDANT ,

Grounds

DECISION

1 UNDER ARTICLE 39 OF TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY ACTIONS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT SHALL NOT HAVE SUSPENSORY EFFECT . THE COURT MAY , HOWEVER , IF IT CONSIDERS THAT CIRCUMSTANCES SO REQUIRE , ORDER THAT APPLICATION OF THE CONTESTED DECISION BE SUSPENDED . IT MAY ALSO PRESCRIBE ANY OTHER NECESSARY INTERIM MEASURES .

2 UNDER ARTICLE 83 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF ANY MEASURES AND THE DECISION ORDERING INTERIM MEASURES ARE DEPENDENT ON THE EXISTENCE OF CIRCUMSTANCES GIVING RISE TO URGENCY AND TO GROUNDS ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR SUCH MEASURES .

3 BY GENERAL DECISION 2794/80/ECSC OF 31 OCTOBER 1980 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 291 , P . 1 ), A SYSTEM OF STEEL PRODUCTION QUOTAS WAS ESTABLISHED FOR UNDERTAKINGS IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY . UNDER ARTICLE 2 ( 1 ) OF THAT DECISION THE COMMISSION IS TO FIX QUARTERLY PRODUCTION QUOTAS FOR CRUDE STEEL AND FOR FOUR OTHER GROUPS OF ROLLED PRODUCTS .

4 UNDER ARTICLE 3 , THE COMMISSION IS TO FIX THOSE QUOTAS FOR EACH UNDERTAKING ' ' ON THE BASIS OF THE REFERENCE PRODUCTION FIGURES AS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 4 OF THAT UNDERTAKING ( AND ) BY APPLICATION OF ABATEMENT RATES TO THESE REFERENCE PRODUCTION FIGURES AS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 5 ' ' .

5 THE COMMISSION APPLIED THE GENERAL DECISION TO GREEK UNDERTAKINGS WITH EFFECT FROM 1 JANUARY 1981 . BY INDIVIDUAL DECISION OF 3 FEBRUARY 1981 IT FIXED QUOTAS FOR THE APPLICANT FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF 1981 AS FOLLOWS :

6 BY APPLICATION , REGISTERED ON 20 FEBRUARY 1981 , THE APPLICANT BROUGHT AN ACTION UNDER ARTICLE 33 OF THE ECSC TREATY IN SUBSTANCE FOR THE ANNULMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL DECISION OF 3 FEBRUARY 1981 . THE APPLICATION IS BASED PRINCIPALLY ON THE CLAIM , FIRST , THAT THE GENERAL DECISION WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THE CONTESTED INDIVIDUAL DECISION , IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE IRON AND STEEL UNDERTAKINGS OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC AND , SECONDLY , THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL FOR LACK OF AN ADEQUATE STATEMENT OF THE REASONS ON WHICH IT IS BASED AND FOR INFRINGEMENT OF ARTICLES 14 , 58 AND 74 OF THE ECSC TREATY .

7 ON 20 FEBRUARY 1981 THE APPLICANT , UNDER ARTICLE 39 OF THE ECSC TREATY AND ARTICLE 83 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT , BROUGHT AN APPLICATION FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF THE CONTESTED DECISION .

8 IT POINTS OUT THAT IT IS A NEW UNDERTAKING WHICH DID NOT START PRODUCTION UNTIL 1977 . ALTHOUGH PRODUCTION INCREASED RAPIDLY , RISING AS REGARDS ROLLED PRODUCTS IN GROUP IV , FROM 39 223 TONNES IN 1977 TO 120 535 TONNES IN 1978 , 185 752 TONNES IN 1979 AND 238 297 TONNES IN 1980 , ACCOUNT MUST BE TAKEN OF THE FACT THAT THAT INCREASE WAS FROM A VERY SMALL INITIAL PRODUCTION . IT ADDS THAT THE VOLUME OF PRODUCTION FOR 1980 SUFFERED UNFAVOURABLY FROM THE EFFECTS OF AN EARTHQUAKE AND A STRIKE IN THE ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY .

9 FROM THIS THE APPLICANT DEDUCES THAT THE APPLICATION OF THE SYSTEM OF QUOTAS BROUGHT INTO OPERATION BY THE GENERAL DECISION HAS INEQUITABLE RESULTS SO FAR AS CONCERNS THE APPLICANT WHICH DISTORT ITS COMPETITIVE POSITION . SINCE THE FACTS RELATE NOT TO A PERIOD OF NORMAL ACTIVITY BUT TO A PERIOD IN WHICH A NEW UNDERTAKING WAS GETTING UNDER WAY , THE REFERENCE PRODUCTION FIGURES TAKEN HOLD BACK AN INCREASE IN PRODUCTION WHICH FEATURES A NASCENT UNDERTAKING . THE APPLICANT IS THUS PUT INTO A MARKEDLY LESS FAVOURABLE SITUATION THAN ITS AVERAGE COMPETITOR .

10 THE APPLICANT FURTHER POINTS OUT THAT THE QUOTAS ADOPTED JEOPARDIZE THE UNDERTAKINGS WHICH IT HAS ENTERED INTO FOR ITS EXPORT PRODUCTS . FINALLY , IT GIVES PARTICULARS OF SUBSTANTIAL LOSSES FOR THE FIRST TWO MONTHS OF 1981 WHICH IT ATTRIBUTES TO THE APPLICATION OF THE QUOTA SYSTEM .

11 ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT FAILED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADAPTATION OF THE QUOTAS OFFERED IN PARTICULAR BY ARTICLES 4 ( 4 ) AND 14 OF THE GENERAL DECISION , THE COMMISSION STATED IN THE COURSE OF THE ORAL PROCEDURE THAT IT WAS PREPARED TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE APPLICANT COULD BENEFIT FROM SUCH ADAPTATION PROVIDED IT WAS FURNISHED WITH THE FACTS NECESSARY TO ENABLE IT TO ASSESS THE SITUATION .

Operative part

ON THOSE GROUNDS

BY WAY OF AN INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT ,

HEREBY ORDERS AS FOLLOWS :

2 . THE APPLICANT SHALL FURNISH THE COMMISSION WITH ALL INFORMATION NECESSARY FOR THIS PURPOSE .

3 . THE COMMISSION SHALL INFORM THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT NOT LATER THAN 15 APRIL 1981 OF THE RESULT OF THIS INVESTIGATION .

4 . THE REMAINDER OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF INTERIM MEASURES IS DISMISSED .

5 . THE COSTS ARE RESERVED .