C-2/62
ECLI:EU:C:1962:41
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61962CO0002
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
COMMISSION v LUXEMBOURG & KINGDOM OF BELGIUM
purpose of rectifying certain omissions, with the organization which in fact on 4 April 1962 took a Decision which is exists and its application in practice, these
designed to meet circumstances such as possibilities always hold out the promise those in the present case. I refer to the of satisfactory results. All I shall say is Decision relating to the levying of a that, upon an examination of the relevant countervailing charge on certain goods, principles at an abstract level, I find derived from the processing of agricul that such possibilities not only have the defendants' tural products. The advantage being integrated into the of
representatives themselves agreed to system of the Treaty, without damaging
this Decision. The Belgian Government the structure of the Treaty itself and drew the necessary consequences of the without raising fears of a collapse of its Decision to the extent that on 1 February principles, but that they are also in line 1962 it submitted that it should apply with the supranational organization of
to the case of the production of ginger the Community with which autonomous bread, without, it is true, obtaining a and unilateral measures of Member positive result. States can in cases of doubt be reconciled We need not consider here only with difficulty. whether,
In view of all these considerations the opinion of the Commission must be approved and confirmed and the Kingdom of Belgium and the Grand
Duchy of Luxembourg must accordingly be declared to have contravened their obligations under the Treaty, by increasing, after the entry into force
of the Treaty, the special duty levied on the issue of import licences for
gingerbread and by extending this duty to products similar to gingerbread
listed in Heading No 19.08 of the Common Customs Tariff.
As the applications are admissible and well founded, the costs should be
paid by the defendants, in accordance with the application of the Commission.
ORDER OF THE COURT
3 DECEMBER 1962 1
In Joined Cases 2 and 3/62
Commission of the European Economic Community
v
1 . Government of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
and
2. Government of the Kingdom of BELGIUM
1 — Language of the Case: French.
ORDER OF 3.12.1962 — JOINED CASES 2 AND 3/62
THE COURT
composedof: A. M. Dormer, President, L. Delvaux and R. Rossi (Presidents
of Chambers), O. Riese, Ch. L. Hammes, A. Trabucchi and R. Lecourt (Rapporteur), Judges,
Advocate Gen ral: K. Roemer Registra: A. Van Houtte
deciding upon an application by the Belgian Government, lodged on 10 November 1962, for the reopening of the oral procedure,
makes the following
ORDER
Whereas, with the object of invoking ment, on 24 August 1962, as reported in beige' the Association Agreement between the the 'Moniteur of 31 October EEC and Greece and also the preamble 1962, p. 9682: Belgian law of 11 September Whereas the Belgian Law of 11 Septem to a 1962, the Government of the Kingdom of ber 1962 received the assent of the King Belgium, by an application dated 10 of the Belgians on the same date after
November 1962, has made a request for it had been publicly debated and
the reopening of the oral procedure in adopted at sittings of the Chamber on Joined Cases 2 and 3/62 of 21 February 12 and 19 July 1962 and of the Senate on 1962; 25 July 1962, as reported in the 'Moniteur beige' Whereas the Court cannot find in the on 27 October 1962, p. 9491; matters raised anything of relevance Whereas the said matters were thus
which would justify the use of its powers known before 19 October 1962, the
under Article 61 of the Rules of Pro date of the oral procedure, to the party cedure to order the reopening of the making the application for the reopening oral of the said procedure and which there procedure; Whereas the Association Agreement fore had the time and opportunity to
between the EEC and Greece was argue them at the hearing; finally ratified (by the exchange of Whereas the said matters were thus
instruments of ratification) by the fore for Article 61 of the applying Governments of the Member States of Rules of Procedure; the EEC, including the Belgian Govern-
On those grounds,
Upon hearing the Advocate-Gnral;
COMMISSION v LUXEMBOURG & KINGDOM OF BELGIUM
THE COURT
hereby
1. Declares that there are no grounds for ordering the reopening of the oral procedure;
2. Orders the party making the application of 10 November 1962 on the procedural issue to pay the costs involved in that application.
Luxembourg, 3 December 1962.
A. Van Houtte A. M. Donner Registrar President