C-29/69

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 12 NOVEMBER 19691

Erich Stauder

v City of Ulm, Sozialamt2 (Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart)

Case 29/69

Summary

1. Measures adopted by an institution — Decision addressed to all Member States — Interpretation — Criteria — Consideration of different language versions of the measure in question (EEC Treaty, Article 189)

City of Ulm, Sozialamt (Social Welfare Office),

on the following question:

'Can the fact that the Decision of the Commission of the European Com­ munities of 12 February 1969 (69/71/EEC) makes the sale of butter at a

1 — Language of the Case: German. 2 — CMLR.

JUDGMENT OF 12. 11. 1969 — CASE 29/69

reduced price to beneficiaries under certain welfare schemes dependent on revealing the name of the beneficiary to the sellers be considered compatible with the general principles of Community law in force?,'

I — Facts and procedure The French version states that the butter may only be obtained in exchange for a The decision by the Commission of 12 'bon individualise', the Dutch version February 1969 on measures to allow states that it may only be obtained in certain categories of consumers to buy exchange for an 'op naam gestelde bon', butter at a reduced price (Official Jour­ and the Italian version, lastly, says that nal 1969 L 52/9) authorizes Member it may only be obtained in exchange for States to make butter available at a re­ a 'buono individualizzato'. duced price to certain categories of con­ The Federal Republic of Germany made sumers who are beneficiaries under a use of this authorization and issued cards social welfare scheme and whose income in accordance with the 'Richtlinien für does not enable them to buy butter at die Abgabe verbilligter Butter an Emp­ normal prices. fanger bestimmter sozialen Hilfen' ('Dir­ Article 4 of this decision provides in ectives regarding the issue of cheap the German version that: butter to persons in receipt of certain 'Die Mitgliedstaaten treffen alle erfor­ welfare benefits') of 11 March 1969 derlichen Maßnahmen damit ... die (Bundesanzeiger No 52 of 15 March Begünstigten der in Artikel 1 vorgese­ 1969, p. 3). The cards consisted of de­ henen Maßnahmen Butter nur gegen tachable coupons with a stub which had, einen auf ihren Namen ausgestellten in order to be valid, to bear the name Gutschein erhalten können.' ('Mem­ and address of the beneficiary. ber States shall take all measures According to Chapter V of the above necessary to ensure that . . . those directives, the retailer may only accept entitled to benefit from the measures when selling the butter at a reduced laid down in Article 1 may only re­ price coupons which are still attached to ceive butter in exchange for a coupon the stub, on which must appear, among issued in their names.') other things, the name of the beneficiary.

The plaintiff in the main action is en­ wording of Article 4 of the Decision of titled to buy butter at reduced prices 12 February 1969 makes it impossible because he is a beneficiary of the wel­ to avoid revealing the name of the fare scheme for those disabled in the beneficiary to retailers, who do not war. However, he considers it illegal to normally have a role to play in the pro­ make the appearance of the name of the vision of social welfare to the under­ beneficiary on the stub mentioned above privileged. The Verwaltungsgericht a condition for buying the butter. doubts whether such a condition accords On those grounds: with the law, and considers it in any 1. He lodged by letter of 22 April 1969 case contrary to the German concept of a constitutional complaint with the social welfare and to the German sys­ Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal tem of protection of fundamental rights Constitutional Court) on the grounds which must, at least in part, be guaran­ of infringement of, inter alia, Articles teed equally by the Community institu­ 1 and 3 of the Grundgesetz (Basic tions as part of the protection afforded Law) of the Federal Republic of Ger­ by the provisions of a Community law which has a superior status. many; The order making the reference was 2. He brought an action by letter of 22 lodged at the Court Registry on 26 June May 1969 in the Verwaltungsgericht 1969. Stuttgart (Stuttgart Administrative Written observations were lodged by the Court) against the City of Ulm in Commission of the European Commun­ which he sought an interim order for ities under Article 20 of the Protocol on the removal of this requirement. the Statute of the Court of Justice. On 18 June the Verwaltungsgericht The Commission of the European Com­ Stuttgart made the order for reference munities made its oral observations at containing the question now before the the hearing on 14 October 1969. Court. On 9 August 1969, that is, after The Advocate-General delivered his the order making the reference had been opinion at the hearing on 29 October lodged, there appeared in the Official 1969. Journal of the European Communities a Decision of the Commission of 29 July 1969 (69/244/EEC, Official Journal II — Observations submit­ L 200, p. 29), Article 2 of which pro­ ted to the Court under vides as follows: Article 20 of the Statute '1. In the German version of, Article 4, second indent, of the said Decision (of 12 February 1969) the words Only the Commission presented obser­ "auf ihren Namen ausgestellten" shall vations, and these may be summarized as follows: with effect from 17 February 1969 be replaced by the word "individual­ isierten"; A — Admissibility

the reference, which are concerned with to depart from the text approved by the the lawfulness and validity of the obliga Management Committee it should, in tion to state the name, point to this. accordance with Article 30(3) of EEC The question concerning the compatibil Regulation No 804/68, have notified the ity with the general principles of Com Council and this it did not do. munity law only indicates the reason why In any event, in order to avoid all doubt the provision concerning the indication the Commission has expressly amended of name might be void. the German and Dutch versions of The Commission considers that although Article 4, second indent, by Article 2 it is badly formulated, the admissibility of its Decision of 29 July 1969 with of the question is not in doubt. effect from 17 February 1969 (Official Journal 1969 L 200/29).

1. The question put to the Court con stance, a uniform measure and by its cerns the compatibility of the contested purpose and origins. measure with the general principles of The version to be preferred is the French Community law in force. version if the origin of the decision is That is in tact the only law with which borne in mind. In fact the Management it could be concerned because Commun Committee expressly decided at its meet ity institutions are subject only to that ing of 29 January 1969 to modify, in law and the Court of Justice can only the draft decision drawn up by the examine regulations adopted by those Commission, the clause to the effect institutions in the light of that law. that beneficiaries could only obtain but The protection guaranteed by fundamen ter in exchange for a coupon referring tal rights is, as regards Community law, to the person concerned, 'détaché d'une assured by various provisions in the carte portant l'identité de l'acheteur' Treaty, such as Articles 7 and 40(3); ('detached from a card indicating the this is written law supplemented in its buyer's identity'). Those last words were turn by unwritten Community law, de removed from the draft approved by the rived from the general principles of law

STAUDER v ULM

As 17 July 1963, Government of the Italian that was impossible, the butter had to Republic v Commission of the EEC, be sold through the trade. In order to Case 13/63 [1963] E.C_R_ 165). make it possible to check that supplies Moreover, Article 40(3) is not applic were being properly used at the time able during the transitional period. of sale, it was considered necessary to As far as Article 7 of the EEC Treaty mark each coupon (for instance by is concerned it has no effect where the numbering) so as to make it possible more specific prohibition of Article 40 to discover to whom the butter had been applies; furthermore, it cannot apply in delivered. the absence of discrimination, and in It is easier to identify the beneficiary if any case this means in the absence of his name is on the coupon. The removal

This results from the principle of the State necessarily entail any legal disadvantage founded on the rule of law. for the person concerned. The reduced The Court of Justice has repeatedly price is a concession which the bene applied this principle in its judgments ficiary can refuse to take up. There is therefore no real encroachment on his to certain aspects of the acts of Com munity institutions without however, rights in the classical sense of the word. holding that it applies to all the activities of the Communities or in particular to Lastly, regard for the principle of pro the legislative measures of the Council portionality need not entail substitution and of the Commission. of a judicial assessment for the discretion However that may be, this rule has not allowed to the institution having the been violated in this case. power to issue the contested measure. In fact the principal aim of selling One can only consider that the principle butter at a reduced price is to reduce has been violated if the means decided the stocks of butter by selling to custo upon as suitable for achievement of the mers whose income is not normally end in view can in no way be justified,

2 The abovementioned decision is addressed to all the Member States and authorizes them, with a view to stimulating the sale of surplus quantities of butter on the Common Market, to make butter available at a lower price than normal to certain categories of consumers who are in receipt of certain social assistance. This authorization is subject to certain conditions designed, inter alia, to ensure that the product, when marketed in this way, is not prevented from reaching its proper destination. To that end Article 4 of Decision No 69/71 stipulates in two of its versions, one being the German version, that the States must take all necessary measures to ensure that beneficiaries can only purchase the product in question on presentation of a 'coupon indicating their names', whilst in the other versions, however, it is only stated that a 'coupon referring to the person concerned' must be shown, thus making it possible to employ other methods of checking in addition to naming the bene­ ficiary. It is therefore necessary in the first place to ascertain exactly what methods the provision at issue prescribes.

3 When a single decision is addressed to all the Member States the necessity for uniform application and accordingly for uniform interpretation makes it impossible to consider one version of the text in isolation but requires that it be interpreted on the basis of both the real intention of its author and the aim he seeks to achieve, in the light in particular of the versions in all four languages.

STAUDER v ULM

4 In a case like the present one, the most liberal interpretation must prevail, provided that it is sufficient to achieve the objectives pursued by the decision in question. It cannot, moreover, be accepted that the authors of the decision intended to impose stricter obligations in some Member States than in others.

Upon reading the pleadings; Upon hearing the report of the Judge-Rapporteur; Upon hearing the observations of the Commission of the European Com­ munities; Upon hearing the opinion of the Advocate-General; Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Com­ munity, especially Articles 7, 40 and 177; Having regard to Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of the Council of 27 June 1968; Having regard to the Decisions of the Commission of the European Com­ munities Nos 69/71 of 12 February 1969 and 69/244 of 29 July 1969;

OPINION OF MR ROEMER — CASE 29/69

Having regard to the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Economic Community, especially Article 20; Having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Communities,

THE COURT

in answer to the question referred to it by the Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart by order of that court of 18 June 1969 hereby rules:

I. The second indent of Article 4 of Decision No 69/71/(EEC) of 12 February 1969, as rectified by Decision No 69/244/(EEC), is to be interpreted as only requiring the identification of those benefiting from the measures for which it provides; it does not, however, re­ quire or prohibit their identification by name so as to enable checks to be made;

DELIVERED ON 29 OCTOBER 19691

Mr President, the butter surplus with the aid of Members of the Court, measures designed to increase con­ sumption. The excess butter production in the This was the intention behind the Deci­ Community and the failure until now sion of the Commission of 12 February to produce effective measures to prevent 1969 (Official Journal L 52 69) taken in increases in production has made it ever pursuance of Articles 28 and 35 of more imperative to attempt to reduce Regulation No 804/68 of the Council

1 — Translated from the German.