C-9/65
ECLI:EU:C:1965:63
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61965CO0009
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
SAN MICHELE v HIGH AUTHORITY
for the statement of reasons for a claim final data of the equalization assessment
of the essentials of which the applicant decided on 31 December 1965 and to
itself failed to provide any evidence allow it to submit an administrative
modifica whatsoever. appeal on the ground of the
In cue circumstances, I consider that tion of the criteria which had taken
the claims for damages also have no place. The other problems which have chance of success in this case. not been considered in substance in this case might be settled in the course 4. Procedural issues and the decision of a new action, after the adoption of a on the costs formal decision which is reserved to
The legal position as it was when the the High Authority. But for the present applications were filed justifies this it is impossible for procedural reasons
appraisal. I have already emphasized in to consider the new facts. Since this
other cases—and I come now to the appraisal may fee justified by the terms
applicant's application for 'the adoption of the letter and the High Authority's of an interim measure which has not well-known mode of procedure, I con
yet been settled—that the subsequent sider 'that there is no reason to take
adoption of General Decision No 19/65 these measures into account in the
finally fixing the equalization of ferrous decision on the costs. This also holds
scrap (and also, in consequence, the good for the settlement of the costs in High Authority's letter of 28 January the later procedural issue, as 'there were
1966 which is based on that decision) no objective grounds for doubting that Author is irrelevant copy submitted by the High applica to the appraisal of the
tions already commenced. The clear ity conformed to the original. purpose of the letter in question was Consequently, the costs must be borne
merely to notify the applicant of the by the applicant.
III — Conclusion
I am therefore of the opinion that:
The applications are admissible but unfounded. The applicant must bear the costs, including those of the procedural issue which has not yet been decided.
ORDER OF THE COURT 19651 22 JUNE
In Case 9/65
ACCIAIERIE San MICHELE SpA , having its registered office in Turin, repre
sented by its sole director, Adriano Vigna, assisted by Arturo Cottrau,
1 — Language of the Case: Italian.
ORDER OF 22. 6. 1965 — JOINED CASES 9 AND 58/65
Advocate of the Turin Bar and of the Corte di Cassazione, Rome, with an
address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Georges Margue,
applicant,
v
High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community , repre
sented by its Agent, Italo Telchini, assisted by Professor Ori Giacchi of the Milan Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at its offices, 2 Place de Metz,
defendant,
Facts
Whereas, by an application lodged at 2. To prescribe a new period for the
the Court Registry on 2 February 1965, submission by the applicant of its the San Michele undertaking requested reply in the event of the Corte the Court to annul the individual deci Costituzionale della Repubblica
by the High Authority on sion adopted Italiana dismissing as unfounded the 13 December 1964 and notified on 24 question of constitutionality which
December 1964, under the terms of was referred to it by order of the
which the applicant company is obliged Tribunale di Torino of 19 December to pay the sum of 114 055 664 lire by 1964; way of contribution due for the 3. In the event of the present applica
equalization of imported ferrous scrap tion for the adoption of an interim and scrap treated as such; Whereas, by a statement lodged at the measure being dismissed, to prescribe a new period for the submission 'by Court Registry on 28 April 1965, the the applicant of its reply; applicantcompany claimed that the
Court should: order the defendant to bear the costs;'
reject all the defendant's pleas to the Whereas contrary and, reserving its decision for the applicant annexed to the
the final judgment in Case 9/65, decide said statement a copy of 'the order of
as follows: the Tribunale di Torino, issued in the
1. To action pending before it between the suspend judgment in Case 9/65 decision is applicant and the European Coal and until a obtained 'in the Steel Community; proceedings now pending before the
Corte Costituzionale as to the con Whereas in a statement lodged at the
Court Registry on 18 May 1965 the stitutionality and validity of Law No 766 of 1952 rendering defendant contended that the Court the ECSC should: Treaty enforceable in Italy and in particular the provisions of the 'dismiss the application to suspend pro
second paragraph of Article 33, ceedings made by the applicant and
Article 41 and the last paragraph of order the latter to bear the relevant
Article 92 of the Treaty; costs';
SAN MICHELE v HIGH AUTHORITY
Grounds
Whereas in Case 9/65, pending before the Court, on the application of the San Michele undertaking against the decision of the High Authority of 13 November 1964, the said undertaking applied for the adoption of an interim measure suspending judgment until a decision has been given by the Corte Costituzionale Italiana, which has been requested to give a ruling on whether various provisions of the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel
Community are unconstitutional;
Whereas the file indicates that it is appropriate that a ruling be given
immediately, basis the parties'
on the sole of the statements, as to whether
said application is well founded;
Whereas after a fine was imposed upon the San Michele undertaking by the High Authority on 18 December 1962, as a result of a judgment of the Court of Justice of 14 December 1962, for failure to submit electricity invoices required for the equalization calculation, the said undertaking objected to the implementation of that decision and brought the matter before the Tribunale di Torino, on the ground that the introduction into the Italian legal system by an ordinary law of certain provisions of the Treaty meant that they could not be pleaded against the San Michele undertaking;
Whereas the said Tribunale, doubting the 'privileged status'
of the law arising from Treaty and the constitutionality of the institutions and legal the pro
cedures of the Community, declared by order of 19 December 1964 that the
unconstitutionality in 'not clearly unfounded'
objection of question was and
brought the question of the validity of Articles 33, 41 and 92 of the ECSC
Treaty before the Corte Constituzionale;
Whereas, in support of its application based on those factors for the adoption of the above-mentioned interim measure, the applicant thus alleged that the 'absolute' judgment to be given by the Corte Constituzionale carried authority and 'any court having that jurisdiction over Italian citizens'
was obliged
to suspend judgment;
Whereas, however, the Court of Justice, as the institution entrusted with
ensuring that in the interpretation and application of the Treaty the law is
observed, can only take into consideration the instrument of ratification, which itself was deposited on behalf of Italy on 22 July 1952 and which, together with the other instruments of ratification, brought the Treaty into force;
ORDER OF 22. 6. 1965 — JOINED CASES 9 AND 58/65
Whereas it is clear from the instruments of ratification, whereby the Member States bound themselves in an identical manner, that all States have adhered to the Treaty on the same conditions, definitively and without any reserva
tions other than those set out in the supplementary protocols, and that there
fore any claim by a national of a Member State questioning such adherence
would be contrary to the system of Community law;
Whereas such a claim is all the more inadmissible in that, in this case, any Commu decision to suspend judgment would be tantamount to reducing the nity to a cipher by regarding the instrument of ratification either as only partially accepting the Treaty, or as the means of according to it different legal consequences, varying with the Member State concerned, or as the
means whereby some nationals might evade its rules;
Whereas the participation of the Italian Republic in the common institutions
and in the rights and obligations arising from the Treaty in fact preclude its nationals from avoiding the complete and uniform application of the said
Treaty and from thus obtaining different treatment from that of other nationals in the Community;
Whereas, therefore, there must be dismissed as contrary to Community policy any application the purpose of which is to establish discrimination of this
nature which no law of ratification could introduce into a treaty prohibiting such discrimination;
Whereas the application for the adoption of an interim measure must there
fore be dismissed;
Costs
Whereas under the terms of Article 69 (2) of the Rules of Procedure the unsuccessful party shall be ordered to pay the costs;
On those grounds,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community; Having regard to Articles 69 and 91 of the Rules of Procedure, especially paragraph (3) of the latter Article; Upon hearing the report ot the Judge-Rapporteur; Upon hearing the opinion of the Advocate-General;
SAN MICHELE v HIGH AUTHORITY
THE COURT
composed of: Ch. L. Hammes, President, A. M. Donner and R. Lecourt
(Rapporteur), Presidents of Chambers, L. Delvaux, A. Trabucchi, W. Strauß and R. Monaco, Judges,
Advocate-General: K. Roemer Registrar: A. Van Houtte
Ruling on the basis of the having regard to the urgency parties'
statements, of the case,
hereby orders:
1. The applicationmade on 24 April 1965 by the San Michele com
pany for the adoption of an interim measure suspending judgment in Case 9/65 is dismissed;
2. A new period shall be granted to the applicant for the submission of its reply;
3. The applicant shall bear the costs of the present application.
Luxembourg, 22 June 1965.
A. Van Houtte Ch. L. Hammes Registrar President