1. 

The proceedings in this case have followed a more elaborate path than usual. After the normal exchange of pleadings, the parties were heard on 27 November 1990 and I delivered my Opinion on 10 January 1991. By order of 2 May 1991, the Court ordered the reopening of the oral procedure, and after a further hearing I delivered a further Opinion on 19 September 1991, in which I considered such new matters as had been advanced by the parties, but reached the same conclusion as in my first Opinion. Unfortunately, however, the Court was unable to reach a decision in its then composition, and consequently by order of 8 October 1991 it reopened the oral procedure once again. A new hearing was initially fixed for 26 November 1991 but was subsequently postponed to 28 January 1992.

2. 

Having considered the observations made by the parties at yesterday's hearing, I can find nothing to add to my earlier Opinions. I therefore remain of the view that the case should be disposed of in accordance with the solution put forward in those Opinions.