Keywords
Summary

Keywords

1 . QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING - JURISDICTION OF THE COURT - INTERPRETATION OF COMMUNITY LAW ENABLING THE NATIONAL COURT TO ASSESS THE COMPATIBILITY OF NATIONAL PROVISIONS THEREWITH - AVAILABILITY TO THE COMMISSION OF AN ACTION AGAINST A MEMBER STATE FOR FAILURE TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS IN RESPECT OF THOSE PROVISIONS - IRRELEVANT

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 169 , 170 AND 177 )

2 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON EXPORTS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - CONCEPT

( EEC TREATY , ART . 34 )

3 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - UNDERTAKINGS WITH SPECIAL OR EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS - OBLIGATIONS ON MEMBER STATES

( EEC TREATY , ART . 90 ( 1 ))

4 . COMPETITION - UNDERTAKINGS ENTRUSTED WITH THE OPERATION OF SERVICES OF GENERAL ECONOMIC INTEREST OR HAVING THE CHARACTER OF A REVENUE-PRODUCING MONOPOLY - PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY - DIRECT EFFECT - NONE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 90 ( 2 ))

5 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON EXPORTS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - DIRECTIVE 75/439 - COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF WASTE OILS BY APPROVED UNDERTAKINGS - NATIONAL LEGISLATION PROHIBITING EXPORTS TO AUTHORIZED UNDERTAKINGS OF OTHER MEMBER STATES - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 34 ; COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 75/439 )

Summary

1 . THE FACT THAT ARTICLES 169 AND 170 OF THE TREATY ENABLE THE COMMISSION AND THE MEMBER STATES TO BRING BEFORE THE COURT A STATE WHICH HAS FAILED TO FULFIL ONE OF ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE TREATY DOES NOT MEAN THAT INDIVIDUALS CANNOT PLEAD THOSE OBLIGATIONS , SHOULD THE OCCASION ARISE , BEFORE A NATIONAL COURT , WHICH MAY REFER THE MATTER TO THIS COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY .

ALTHOUGH IN THE CONTEXT OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY THE COURT MAY NOT RULE ON THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF A NATIONAL LAW WITH THE TREATY , IT HAS JURISDICTION TO PROVIDE THE NATIONAL COURT WITH ALL THE CRITERIA OF INTERPRETATION RELATING TO COMMUNITY LAW WHICH MAY ENABLE IT TO ASSESS SUCH COMPATIBILITY .

2 . THE PROHIBITION IN ARTICLE 34 OF THE TREATY CONCERNS ALL NATIONAL MEASURES WHICH HAVE AS THEIR SPECIFIC OBJECT OR EFFECT THE RESTRICTION OF PATTERNS OF EXPORTS AND THEREBY THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A DIFFERENCE IN TREATMENT BETWEEN THE DOMESTIC TRADE OF A MEMBER STATE AND ITS EXPORT TRADE , IN SUCH A WAY AS TO PROVIDE A SPECIAL ADVANTAGE FOR NATIONAL PRODUCTS OR FOR THE DOMESTIC MARKET OF THE STATE IN QUESTION .

3 . THE GRANT BY A MEMBER STATE OF AN EXCLUSIVE RIGHT WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 90 ( 1 ) OF THE TREATY DOES NOT EXEMPT THE MEMBER STATE FROM THE OBLIGATION TO RESPECT OTHER PROVISIONS OF COMMUNITY LAW , PARTICULARLY THOSE RELATING TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS .

4 . ARTICLE 90 ( 2 ) OF THE TREATY CANNOT AT THIS STAGE CREATE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WHICH THE NATIONAL COURTS MUST PROTECT .

5 . THE COMMUNITY RULES ON FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 75/439 ON THE DISPOSAL OF WASTE OILS DO NOT ALLOW A MEMBER STATE TO ORGANIZE A SYSTEM FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF WASTE OILS WITHIN ITS TERRITORY IN SUCH A WAY AS TO PROHIBIT EXPORTS TO AN AUTHORIZED DISPOSAL OR REGENERATING UNDERTAKING IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE .