C-92/77

and

THE MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE

on the interpretation and the validity of certain provisions of Regulations No 685/69 and No 2517/74 of the Commission concerning private storage aid for butter and cream,

THE COURT (First Chamber)

composed of: G. Bosco, President of Chamber, A. M. Donner and A. O'Keeffe, Judges,

Advocate General : H. Mayras Registrar: A. Van Houtte

market in milk and milk products Article 27 of Regulation No 685/69 (Official Journal, English Special stipulates that for calculation of aid for Edition 1968 (I), p. 176) established, the storage of cream, the quantities of within the framework of the (pasteurized) cream shall be converted intervention scheme, a system of aid for into "butter equivalents" by multiplying the private storage of butter and cream the fat content of the cream by 1.25. produced in the Community. Article 26 or the same regulation The aid is granted in respect of provides that aid for private storage quantities stored at the expense of the may be granted only if the duration of producer and in respect of butter manu­ storage is at least four months, and factured during a limited period Article 28 of the regulation provides immediately prior to the commencement that, except in respect of the 1968/69 of storage. The aid is designed marketing year, the storage period shall essentially to counteract seasonal price run from 1 April to 30 September of the fluctuations and to provide for a same year, whereas the period for temporary withdrawal from the market. removal from storage runs from 1 November to 31 March of the following The twelfth recital in the preamble to year. Finally, Article 29, which in its Regulation No 985/68 of the Council original version dealt with the case of of 15 July 1968 laying down general rules for the intervention on the market an increase in aid owing to a decrease in the buying-in price for butter in butter and cream (Official Journal, provided, in the version as amended by English Special Edition 1968 (I), p. 256) states that, "to ensure uniformity in the Regulations No 880/69, No 1064/69 (Official Journal, English Special Community, provisions should be made Edition 1969 (I), p. 218 and p. 235) and for a Community form of storage No 603/70 of the Commission (Official contract and a uniform method of calcu­ Journal, English Special Edition 1970 lating the amount of aid according to (I), p. 169), as follows: the cost of storage and market developments". The intervention agency "Should the buying-in price for butter is bound to conclude such a contract change, the aid specified in Article 24 in with any interested party capable of respect of quantities of butter and of fulfilling the prescribed terms. Those cream expressed as butter equivalent terms are established in detail by the covered by a storage contract and taken Member State concerned and annexed into store before the date on which the

The provisions of the preceding subpar That regulation, like the aforesaid Regu agraphs shall also apply in the event of lation No 2496/74, applied as from 7 a change in the buying-in price for October 1974. butter, expressed in national currency, applied by the intervention agency 3. An Bord Bainne Co-operative concerned". Limited (The Irish Dairy Board) is a co operative society with limited liability That regulation, published on 4 October incorporated under Irish law.

As regards butter in particular, the The plaintiff co-operative society does intervention price was raised, in the case of Ireland, from 163.40 to 170.43 units not contest for the purpose of the present proceedings that the aids of account per 100 kg. Thereby, the payable by virtue of the above intervention price per long ton of butter mentioned contracts should be reduced rose from 1 660.14 to 1 731.57 units of by reason of the increase in the

of this case. of exchange to be applied for Ireland was equal to the representative Relying on the provisions of the conversion rate for the currency of that aforementioned contracts and on the State (at that time: £ 1 Irish = 2.1644 Community legislation concerned, the units of account). That rate was said co-operative society claimed amended by Regulation No 2498/74 of payment of £ 457 475.87 Irish, or the Council of 2 October 1974 (Official 891 391.75 units of account, expressed Journal 1974 L 268, p. 6) and lowered in national currency according to the to 1.9485 units of account per £ 1 Irish. new conversion rate for the Irish pound,

if the increase in the buying-in price for 3. If Regulation (EEC) No 2498/74 of butter is higher than the level of aid, no the Council is to be regarded as aid shall be granted. It contends that having effected such increase in the this is true in the present case, where 'buying-in price for butter' and a the buying-in price of butter for Ireland reduction in aids payable by the has undergone a "double" increase due: defendant to the plaintiff, by reason — first, to the alteration of its level in of the provisions of Regulation units of account, which was brought (EEC) No 2517/74 of the about by Regulation No 2496/74, Commission, is the said Regulation and (EEC) No 2517/74 valid and — secondly, to the alteration of its binding in relation to contracts in level in Irish pounds corresponding the form contained in the Third to the representative rate for the Schedule entered into before the Irish pound laid down by Regulation enactment of the said regulations? No 2498/74. 4. If aid is payable by the defendant to the plaintiff, is the entire aid to be 4. The dispute was brought before the paid at the representative rate for High Court of Ireland, which found that the determination of the issues the Irish pound prevailing on the date of the termination of the between the parties requires an interpre­ storage, or is part of the aid tation of Community law. Thus by an referable to the period prior to 7 order of 13 July 1977, it decided to stay the proceedings and refer the following October 1974, and to be paid at the questions to the Court of Justice for a representative rate prevailing prior to that date?" preliminary ruling under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty: 5. A copy of the order for reference "1. Did Regulation (EEC) No 2498/74 was received at the Court of Justice on of the Council, which altered the 25 July 1977. exchange rate betweenthe Irish pound and the unit of account, An Bord Bainne Co-operative Limited, have the effect of increasing the represented by McCann Fitzgerald 'buying-in price for butter' within Roche and Dudley, Solicitors, assisted the meaning of that expression as by Nial Fennelly and Roderick J. used in Article 29 of Regulation O'Hanlon of Counsel, the Irish (EEC) No 685/69 of the Minister for Agriculture, represented by Commission, as amended by Article Liam J. Lysaght, Chief State Solicitor, 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1064/69 acting as Agent, and the Commission of of the Commission and as further the European Communities represented amended by Article 4 of Regulation by its Legal Adviser, Richard Wain­ (EEC) No 603/70 of the wright, acting as Agent, submitted Commission? written observations pursuant to Article 2. If the answer to the first question is 20 of the Protocol on the Statute of the in the affirmative, did Regulation Court of Justice of the EEC.

Upon hearing the report of the Judge- the time, and the regulation in seeking Rapporteur and the views of the to rectify that situation provided a new Advocate General, the Court opened representative conversion rate for the the oral procedure without any purpose of restoring the new Member preparatory inquiry, and, by an order of Sutes to equal terms with their partners 9 November 1977, assigned the case to in the Community. the First Chamber, in accordance with Furthermore, only the Community Article 95 of its Rules of Procedure. institutions, and not the national intervention agencies, are authorized to alter the intervention price for butter. At II — Written observations sub­ the time when the contracts referred to mitted under Article 20 of in these proceedings were entered into, the Protocol on the Statute Article 29 of Regulation No 685/69 of the Court of Justice of the EEC made provision for change in the amount of aid only in the event of a change in the buying-in price of butter A — An Bord Bainne accepts for the (that is to say, a price expressed in units purpose of the present proceedings that of account). It is to be assumed that the the aids payable to it under the reference in the storage contracts at contracts in question had to be issue in this case to such alteration in diminished by the increase in the price was intended to have the same buying-in price of butter which was meaning. Moreover, it appears from the effected by Regulation No 2496/74 of first subparagraph of Article 10 (1) of the Council. However it claims that it is Regulation No 985/68, stipulating that only through that regulation that the the amount of aid paid to the storer buying-in price for butter could lawfully shall be fixed "for the Community", be changed during the milk marketing that that amount must be the same year concerned, and that there is no throughout the Community. However, legal basis for contending that that price that would not be the case if the has also been changed incidentally and amount of the aid in question could indirectly by the operation of Regu­ have been decreased because of an lation No 2498/74. The reference in alteration in the representative rate of Regulation No 1064/69 to "the the Irish pound. buying-in price" means the buying-in Accordingly, in relation to the first price for butter, as expressed in units of question, An Bord Bainne submits that account, and as determined by special the answer should be that: act of the Council in each milk marketing year, subject only to the right "Regulation (EEC) No 2498/74 of the of the Council to alter such buying-in Council did not have the effect of in­ price by an act passed after due creasing the buying-in price of butter deliberation, during the marketing year within the meaning of that expression as for which such price was fixed. It is used in Article 29 of Regulation (EEC) claimed that Regulation No 2498/74 No 685/69 of the Commission, as has no effect on the buying-in price for amended by Article 2 of Regulation butter: that price, as expressed in units (EEC) No 1064/69 of the Commission, of account, is not affected by the and as further amended by Article 4 of alteration of the representative conver­ Regulation (EEC) No 603/70 of the sion rate for the Irish pound. Commission."

appears in the above-mentioned regu moreover that the application of the lations, can have been altered by the system is made subject to precise effect of Regulation No 2517/74, and conditions, such as the making of thus have been given a new meaning by formal contracts between the interested virtue of that regulation as and from 1 party and the competent intervention October 1974, incorporating the agency and the observance of a concept of the cash equivalent in minimum period of storage, show in monetary terms received by the seller fact that the person claiming to receive into intervention. aid who has entered into a storage contract for that purpose is induced by The interested party's right to obtain those circumstances and by the

buying-in price expressed in national currency could change the contractual that Regulation No 2157/74 should be position, it would unilaterally modify construed as not having jeopardized the the terms of the contracts to the vested rights and legitimate expectations of traders who had already bound interested party's detriment. themselves by storage contracts prior to However, such a unilateral modification its enactment with a view to obtaining of a contractual right would be contrary the aid at issue. Accordingly, the Court to a general principle common to the should reply in the negative to part (b) laws of the Member States, that no one of the second question. should be deprived of property without

year. For the Commission to seek to through in the manner contemplated. change this contractual situation by The regulations concerning the system Regulation No 2517/74, if it is to be of aids for private storage of butter and regarded as affecting storage contracts cream make it particularly necessary entered into prior to its entry into force, that these principles of case-law should would, it is submitted, fail to have be observed and applied. regard to the recognition given in The fact that the amount of aid and Community law to acquired rights and other contents of the contract are fixed to the principle of legitimate expectation by Community regulations and the fact already referred to.

In so doing, not only did the relation to the provisions concerned, the Commission adopt an act which was entitlement to storage aid arises only incompatible with the Treaty and the when the butter is withdrawn from rules of law relating to its application, storage with the written permission of but it also exceeded the powers the intervention agency after the conferred on it by Article 155 (fourth requisite minimum period, the indent) of the Treaty and its powers conditions of contract having in the under Article 6 (7) of Regulation No meantime been fully complied with.

adopted. B — In his written observations, the The Council itself dealt with the Irish Minister for Agriculture refers to the arguments put forward in the main circumstances under which storage aid could be increased or the amount action. He contends in particular that the alteration in the rate of exchange thereof amended, when it prescribed in for the Irish pound, enacted by Regu Regulation No 985/68 that the amount lation No 2498/74 of the Council, of aid could be "increased" when the resulted in an increase in the buying-in market had developed unfavourably under conditions which could not be price of butter expressed in Irish foreseen, and that the amount of aid currency which was applied by the could be "amended" for "future intervention agencies; and that the result of this increase, added to the contracts" if the state of the market so increase brought about by Regulation required, but it made no provision for No 2496/74 of the Council fixing for "decrease" in aids in the case of existing

Even if the Finally, as regards the answer to the "buying-in price" for butter, referred to fourth question, An Bord Bainne submits in Regulation No 1064/69 and in the that, having regard in particular to contracts entered into by the plaintiff, Articles 4 (2) and 6 of Regulation No formerly meant the intervention price 1134/68, Article 26 of Regulation No determined in units of account by 685/69, the various clauses of the special act of the Council for each storage contracts entered into in this marketing year, that expression was case and the case-law of the Court in given a new meaning as from 1 October

1974, the date on which Regulation No calculated on the basis of foreseeable 2517/74 entered into force, incor price trends should be recalculated in porating the concept of "the cash the event of an act by the Community equivalent in monetary terms" received which affected prices either by way of a by the seller into intervention. decrease, as originally envisaged, or of The Minister for Agriculture also an increase, as subsequently included. In contends that, in the circumstances the one case, the expected profit of the storer on the total operation would be mentioned in the last question referred for a preliminary ruling, the amount unexpectedly diminished, and in the other it would be unexpectedly payable to the plaintiff in discharge of

It For the rest, he refers to the written might be argued that even without such observations submitted to the Court by express provisions Article 29 is to be the Commission of the European interpreted in the same sense, since its Communities. objectives are precisely to compensate the storer under contract for C — The Commission of the European Community price changes which might Communities first of all sets out the adversely affect his position in the features of the system of aid for the market at the end of the storage period, private storage of butter and cream, or vice versa. which is intended to counteract seasonal In fact, the motivation stated in Regu price fluctuations by a temporary lation No 2517/74 does show that the withdrawal from the market, and which regulation is to be regarded as bringing is to be contrasted with the system of about a material change in the purchase by intervention agencies. application of Article 29.

moment. That article in its original by 5% were subject to storage contracts form, which provided only for an concluded with the intervention agency, increase in the amount of the aid, a special aid intended to counteract the sought to compensate the storer for a loss which resulted from the application proposed reduction in the intervention of the new representative exchange rate price for butter. It was thus felt right for the Dutch guilder decided by the that an aid whose amount had been Council. At that time the view was

taken by the Community authorities relationship between the unit of account that Article 29, as it was then drafted, and a national currency as well as could not properly be interpreted so as between the different national to give the Dutch storer under contraa currencies. an automatic right to increase in the aid After outlining the functioning and the payable as a result of the effective origin of such system, the Commission decrease in the buying-in price, as points out that any amendment to the expressed in guilders, resulting from the representative rate has the effect of conversion rate change, and that some changing the level of agricultural prices other action was therefore required in within the Member State concerned, up order to compensate the storer. in the case of a devaluation of the A further point of interest is the date of representative rate, down in the case of entry into force of Regulation No a revaluation. In order to mitigate the 2517/74 which, having been adopted on disadvantages associated with reval 3 October 1974 and published on 4 uation, consisting in particular in the October, entered into force on 1 case of Member States with stronger

Journal 1975 L 79, p. 52). This regu is exceptional since it contravened one lation provides that any additional of the principles of the common organi amount added to the buying-in price zation of the agricultural markets, prior to the application of a new which is based on an annual price buying-in price is to be regarded as a review on the basis of which producers price increase within the meaning of the and traders can make their forecasts aforesaid Article 29 with a consequent and plans for the whole year.

AN BORD BAINNE v MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE

such interpretation would in its view be on the rights of the storer as consistent with the objectives of the said provided for by Article 29. The article, which aims to neutralize for the objective of that provision is to storer the effects of unforeseeable prevent storers of butter and cream under contracts with intervention changes in the price which he will obtain at the end of the storage period agencies from incurring unfore­ which are brought about by Community seeable changes or benefits as a price decisions. However, in view of the result of price changes brought position it has consistently adopted, the about by Community legislation (Cf. Annex II to the Written Obser­ Commission feels obliged to argue in favour of a narrower inerpretation of vations of the Commission). Article 29 of Regulation No 685/69, to — Regarding the complaint based on the effect that Regulation No 2498/74 the argument that Regulation No results in increasing the buying-in price 2517/74 has retroactive effects, the for butter only by reason of the Commission points out that it amendments made by Regulation No adopted the regulation in the belief 2517/74. that the regulation of the Council

JUDGMENT OF 23. 2. 1978 — CASE 92/77

Although that since a storer could have grounds objective is not explicitly stated, for complaining of the retroactive storers could not reasonably expect effects of the said regulation only if that the philosophy underlying the the devaluation had taken place on 1 aforementioned provision would not October and the goods had been also be applied in the case of a removed from storage between 1 change in the intervention price as and 4 October. expressed in national currency. All — Regarding the complaint of inter the more so since, as has been ference with vested rights, the pointed out, measures had been Commission begins by analysing the taken in 1973 to compensate Dutch storers for the effects of the reval storage contracts concluded in this case, in particular Conditions Nos uation of the Dutch guilder on the 10 to 13 and No 17 thereof.

June. Again, even assuming that Secondly, it must not be forgotten condition to have been fulfilled, it that even where such rights exist, would be most consistent with the they are subject to certain limits, case-law of the Court regarding and that in any event, the guarantees "vested rights" to conclude that the given by virtue of such rights cannot applicant had no effective right be extended to protect mere under any of its contracts to be paid commercial interests or oppor a particular sum by way of the aid at tunities, involving an element of risk issue unul the quantities in question which is of the essence of economic had been removed from storage. activity. — Regarding the argument to the effect that on the facts of this case The Commission also rejects the the applicant was deprived of a complaint of misuse of powers, basing benefit which it was reasonably itself on the general considerations entitled to expect, it is contended already set out and pointing out that, that that argument runs counter to according to the calculations set out in the case-law of the Court, in Annex II to its Written Observations,

the financial position of storers in the "1. Article 29 of Regulation No 685/69 applicant's situation is more favourable of the Commission of 14 April 1969 than it was prior to the devaluation of on detailed rules of application for the Irish pound, when the reduction of intervention on the market in butter the aid in question to nought is also and cream as amended by Regu­ taken into account. The Commission lation No 2517/74 is to be further points out that a measure such interpreted in the sense that an as the one at issue in this case, by its increase in the buying-in price of content and by its purpose, falls within butter expressed in Irish pounds was the measures which it has the power to brought about by Regulation No 2498/74 of the Council of 2 adopt pursuant to the delegation of powers contained in Article 6 (7) of October 1974 fixing representative Regulation No 804/68 of the Council, conversion rates to be applied in and therefore does not involve a misuse agriculture for the currencies of the new Member States. of powers. 2. Examination of the questions raised Finally the Commission rejects the has not revealed any factor capable complaint of an insufficient statement of of affecting the validity of Regu­ lation No 2517/74 of the reasons, basing itself on the case-law of Commission of 3 October 1974 the Court and observing that the statement of reasons in Regulation No amending Regulation No 685/69 as 2517/74 is not inadequate to the degree regards adjustment of private that the applicant could not in the storage aid for butter to take circumstances of this case discern the account of changes in the buying-in reasons and objectives of the said regu­ price. lation or that the Court would not be in 3. Regulation No 2517/74 is to be a position to review the legality of the applied to butter and cream subject regulation. to contracts relating to private storage which was in store on 3 October 1974." With regard to the fourth question, the Commission states that, in view of its argument set out above to the effect that no aid is payable in this case, it is not obliged to supply an answer. In so III — Oral procedure far as it may be of interest, the Commission puts forward the view that, An Bord Bainne and the Commission of in the case of butter which is in store the European Communities presented under contract at the date of entry into oral argument at the hearing on 1 force of a new representative rate, the December 1977. entire aid is to be paid at the new rate. In particular, the Commission considers The composition of the Chamber that, since the amount due as aid can be having been altered, it was decided, amended under Article 29 of Regulation after hearing the views of the parties to No 685/69 right up to the date of the main action, to re-open the oral removal from store, the aid is not "due procedure at the hearing on 26 January 1978. and payable" until that date. The parties to the main action having On the basis of these observations, the declared that they stood by their Commission proposes that the questions previous statements, the Advocate referred for a preliminary ruling should General delivered his opinion at that be answered as follows: hearing.

« The said co-operative society claims that although the amount of the aid has been reduced owing to the new buying-in price for butter expressed in units of account laid down by Regulation No 2469/74 of the Council of 2 October 1974 (Official Journal 1974, L 268, p. 1) as from 7 October 1974, that does not mean that the said amount has been affected by the alteration of the representative exchange rate for the Irish "green" pound enacted by Regulation No 2498/74 of the Council of 2 October 1974 (Official Journal 1974, L 268, p. 6) also as from 7 October 1974.

5 On the other hand, the intervention agency contends that the buying-in price for butter in Ireland, as applied before 7 October 1974, has undergone a double increase, as its level has been raised both in units of account and in

JUDGMENT OF 23. 2. 1978 — CASE 92/77

Irish national currency, through the combined effect of the two Council regulations aforementioned.

6 It contends that, owing to that increase and in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 29 of Regulation No 685/69 of the Commission, as supplemented by Regulation No 2517/74 of the Commission, no aid is due to the plaintiff co-operative society in respect of the quantities of butter and cream still in storage on the aforementioned date.

7 In the first two questions, the High Court asks whether Regulation No 2498/74 of the Council, which altered the exchange rate between the Irish pound and the unit of account, had the effect of increasing the "buying-in price for butter" within the meaning of that expression as used in Article 29 of Regulation No 685/69 of the Commission, as amended by Regulations No 1064/69 and No 603/70 of the Commission, and whether such increase took place independently of or by virtue of the provisions of Regulation No 2517/74 of the Commission.

"The provisions of the preceding subparagraphs shall also apply in the event of a change in the buying-in price for butter, expressed in national currency, applied by the intervention agency".

13 Regulation No 2517/74, providing for the addition of this last subparagraph to Article 29, entered into force on 1 October 1974 and was therefore applicable when Regulation No 2498/74, adopted on 7 October 1974, entered into force.

14 Therefore the appropriate answer to the first two questions is that Regu­ lation No 2498/74 of the Council of 2 October 1974 brought about an increase in the buying-in price for butter expressed in Irish pounds, by virtue of the provisions of Article 29 of Regulation No 685/69 of the Commission of 14 April 1969, as supplemented by Regulation No 2517/74 of the Commission of 3 October 1974.

15 In its third question, the High Court asks whether, if Regulation No 2498/74 of the Council is to be interpreted as having brought about an increase in the intervention price for butter, by the effect of the provisions of Regulation No 2517/74 of the Commission, the latter regulation is to be regarded as valid and binding in relation to private storage contracts entered into before its entry into force.

16 The system of aid for the private storage of butter provided for by Article 6 (2) of Regulation No 804/68 of the Council of 27 June 1968 is one of the intervention measures introduced by that regulation in order to attain the objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy which are referred to in Article 39 of the Treaty.

17 The sixth and the last recitals in the preamble to Regulation No 985/68 of the Council of 15 July 1968 (Official Journal, English Special Edition 1968 (I), p. 256) state that such measures "must take account of the development of the market situation" and, in the case of private storage in particular, "must contribute to the attainment of a balanced market".

23 Treating a change in the buying-in price expressed in national currency in the same way as a change in that price expressed in units of account, Regu­ lation No 2517/74 merely supplements those rules on the adjustment of private storage aid.

24 Since every decrease or increase in the buying-in price, whatever its origin, is reflected in the market price, particularly in the case of a market with a surplus such as the market in milk products, such treatment in fact allows

AN BORD BAINNE v MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE

the amount of private storage aid to be adjusted to the real and justified needs of storers.

25 The plaintiff in the main action claims that Regulation No 2517/74 interferes with its rights under private storage contracts entered into before its entry into force with the competent national intervention agency, and is therefore contrary to the principle of respect for vested rights.

26 The mere fact of entering into private storage contracts as referred to in Article 9 of Regulation No 985/68 of the Council, and the placing of goods in private storage cannot in themselves suffice to confer any right to payment of a specific amount of aid.

32 According to Article 6 (7) of Regulation No 804/68, "Detailed rules for the application of this article, and in particular the amount of aid for private storage, shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 30".

33 Characterized by the presence of the "Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products", that procedure confers rule-making powers on the Commission which enable it to adopt legislative measures in such fields as the arrangements for aid for private storage of butter.

34 Since Regulation No 2517/74 relates precisely to those arrangements, the complaint of lack of competence raised in the present case is without any legal foundation.

35 Finally, the plaintiff in the main action complains that there is no adequate statement of the reasons on which Regulation No 2517/74 is based.

36 The reasons on which a piece of legislation is based may appear not only from its own wording, but also from the whole body of the legal rules governing the field under consideration.

37 Situated in the context of the rules governing intervention arrangements laid down by Regulations No 804/68 and No 985/68 of the Council, and more particularly in that of private storage aid, Regulation No 2517/74 makes it possible to discern the reasons justifying the addition of the last subpar­ agraph to Article 29 of Regulation No 685/69.

On those grounds,

THE COURT (First Chamber)

in answer to the questions referred to it by the High Court of Ireland by an order of that court dated 13 July 1977, hereby rules:

1. Regulation No 2498/74 of the Council of 2 October 1974 brought about an increase in the buying-in price for butter expressed in Irish pounds, by virtue of the provisions of Article 29 of Regulation No 685/69 of the Commission of 14 April 1969, as supplemented by Regulation No 2517/74 of the Commission of 3 October 1974.

2. Consideration of the third questions raised has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Regulation No 2517/74 of the Commission.

3. Regulation No 2517/74 of the Commission applies to storage contracts entered into before the entry into force of Regulation No 2498/74 of the Council, in respect of quantities of butter not yet removed in the proper manner from storage on that date, namely 7 October 1974.