C-34/78

In adopting Regulation (EEC) No Regulation (EEC) No 802/68 of the 2067/77 concerning the determination of Council. Article 1 of Regulation No the origin of slide fasteners, the 2067/77 is therefore invalid.

Commission exceeded its power under

In Case 34/78

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 117 of the EEC Treaty by the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven, The Hague, The Netherlands, for a preliminary ruling in the action pending before that court between

Yoshida Nederland B.V., Sneek (The Netherlands)

and

Advocate General: F. Capotorti Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Facts and Issues

The facts, procedure, conclusions and components thereof and, inter alia, the submissions and arguments of the parties tapes onto which the slide fasteners are may be summarized as follows: affixed, the metal scoops and the nylon spirals which form the closures.

On the other hand, the sliders used are I — Summary of the facts and manufactured in Japan. procedure Within the context of the exportation of those slide fasteners to Western The plaintiff in the main action, Yoshida Nederland B.V., a vennootschap met Germany and the United States of beperkte aansprakelijkheid (limited America, Yoshida Nederland B.V. liability company), is a Netherlands applied on 8 November 1977 to the company founded in 1964 and a sub- Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken sidiary of the Japanese group YKK voor Friesland (the Chamber of (Tokyo). In its factory in Sneek, Commerce and Manufacture of

could not certify that those slide country of origin of the slide fastener? fasteners were of Netherlands origin. If so, is that article also applicable to However, before the entry into force of slide fasteners which are not closed by Regulation No 2067/77, the rules means of interlocking metal scoops applicable in that respect were contained but by means of interlocking nylon in Regulation No 802/68 of the Council spirals? of 27 June 1968 on the common 2. If the first part of Question 1 is definition of the concept of the origin of answered in the affirmative, which goods, Article 5 of which provides that means that the slide fasteners involved "A product in the production of which in the case cannot be issued with cer- two or more countries were concerned tificates of origin within the meaning shall be regarded as originating in the of Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation country in which the last substantial (EEC) No 802/68 of the Council, is process or operation that is economically Regulation No 2067/77 invalid as justified was performed, having been being in conflict with: carried out in an undertaking equipped (a) Article 5 of Regulation No for the purpose, and resulting in the 802/68? manufacture of a new product or representing an important stage of manu- (b) Or Article 30 of the Treaty? facture" and was interpreted by the (c) Or Article 110 of the Treaty? Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken 3. If Regulation No 2067/77 is not held voor Friesland as authorizing it to grant to be invalid for any of the reasons set Yoshida Nederland B.V. certificates of out under (a), (b) or (c) must the regu- Netherlands origin for the exportation of lation be regarded as being invalid for its slide fasteners. one of the reasons listed by the Yoshida Nederland B.V. brought before appellant set out under numbered the College van Beroep voor het paragraphs (4) to (9) inclusive in the Bedrijfsleven (administrative court of last body of this judgment, or else as instance in matters of trade and industry) being in conflict with any other two decisions of refusal made by the provision or principle of Community Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken law which has not yet been mentioned voor Friesland and requested it to annul by the appellant?" them, claiming in particular that Regu- lation No 2067/77 was invalid and, in The plaintiff in the main action put the alternative, even supposing that the forward in particular the following regulation was valid, that the defendant arguments before the national court: could not apply it as it had done. (a) The validity of Regulation No In those circumstances the Netherlands 2067/77

— The Commission, as the legislative — Article 1 of Regulation No 2067/77 body drawing up the regulation, has is not applicable to slide fasteners declared that the criteria set out whose closures consist of spirals, for in the regulation are applicable which the country of origin must be generally and without distinction for determined by means of direct determining whether slide fasteners application of Article 5 of Regulation originate in the EEC or a Member No 802/68. State of the EEC. The order for reference was entered in — Insufficient reasons are stated for the Court Register on 14 March 1978. Regulation No 2067/77. Written observations were submitted in — Essential procedural requirements accordance with Article 20 of the were not complied with in drawing Protocol on the Statute of the Court of up Regulation No 2067/77 because Justice of the EEC by Yoshida the procedural rules laid down by Nederland B.V., represented by Mr Article 14 of Regulation No 802/68 Alexander, Advocate at The Hague, by were not properly complied with. the Commission of the European — Regulation No 2067/77 was adopted Communities, represented by its Legal in an extremely careless manner. Adviser, Mr Trevor Townsend, acting as Agent, assisted by Mr Haagsma, and by — Regulation No 2067/77 is not the Netherlands, French and Italian completely identical in the six Governments. authentic languages. After hearing the report of the Judge- — If the Commission has "discretionary Rapporteur and the views of the power" to determine the country of Advocate General, the Court decided to origin of slide fasteners, Regulation open the oral procedure without any No 2067/77 is invalid because of preparatory inquiry. "misuse of powers", for since economies of scale require under- takings belonging to the YKK group II — Summary of the written to manufacture sliders in Japan the observations submitted to above-mentioned regulation makes the Court the marketing of slide fasteners more difficult when a certificate of origin A — Observations submitted by Yoshida declaring that the slide fastener orig- Nederland B.V. inates in a Member State of the EEC

fastener factories of the YKK group is This effect of the regulation has had centralized. such serious repercussions on the sales of Yoshida Nederland markets its products slide fasteners that solely for that reason principally in the Netherlands, Belgium a new subsidiary of YKK has been set up and Denmark but also exports to third in Italy which is building a slider factory countries. there.

In these circumstances Yoshida In the EEC, the YKK group has other subsidiaries in the Federal Republic of Nederland B.V. requested the Nether- Germany, France, Italy, the United lands court principally to declare that Kingdom and Belgium. Regulation No 2067/77 was invalid and that court referred to the Court of Since "imports into the Community of Justice the three questions quoted above slide fasteners, particularly of Japanese for a preliminary ruling. origin, have increased considerably in recent years" the Commission introduced as from 1 May 1975 A. The meaning of Question 1 Community surveillance over those according to the plaintiff in the main action imports (Regulation No 646/75 of 13 March 1975, Official Journal L 27 of 14 March 1975, p. 21). That Community Since certificates of origin were refused surveillance is still in force. because the sliders were not manu-

factured in a country of the Community, Yoshida then studies the background to the national court wishes to know Regulation No 2067/77. whether the effect of Article 1 of the The first draft based on tariff heading lation is that in no circumstances can a 78.02 was not successful because of the slide fastener be considered as orig- judgment of 26 January 1977 in Case inating in a country in which in 49/76, Gesellschaft für Überseehandel particular the slider was not manu- mbH v Handelskammer Hamburg [1977] ECR 41 in which it was held in

considered as the country of origin of B. Reply to Question 2 on the invalidity those slide fasteners. of Regulation No 2067/77 for infringement of Article 5 of Regu- Accordingly, a slide fastener can in no lation No 802/68 and Articles 30 and circumstances originate in a country in 110 of the Treaty which certain of those operations, including the manufacture of the slider, (a) Infringement of Article 5 of Regu- have not taken place. lation No 802/68 This reasoning leads to solutions contrary to Article 5 of Regulation No To be valid, Regulation No 2067/77 802/68. However, according to the must be compatible with the superior plaintiff, it is possible to interpret Article provision laid down in Article 5 of Regu- lation No 802/68 of the Council. 1 of Regulation No 2067/77 differently, in other words as follows : However, Regulation No 2067/77 is (a) If the operations listed in the third contrary to Article 5, which provides as follows : column have been carried out in a

Member State, the slide fastener orig- "A product in the production of which inates in that Member State or in the two or more countries were concerned

Community; (b) In all other cases, the origin of a slide fastener must be determined by direct application of the criteria laid down in Article 5 of Regulation No 802/68.

Reply to the second sub-question of Question 1

Slide fasteners are closed either by scoops (in Dutch: haakjes; in German: Haken; in English: scoops; in Italian:

YOSHIDA KAMER VAN KOOPHANDEL EN FABRIEKEN VOOR FRIESLAND

The fact that if the slider alone is not

manufactured in a country the finished product in that country is not a product originating in that country whatever the complexity of all the operations which enable it to be manufactured in the same

factory is contrary to Article 5 of Regu- lation No 802/68.

JUDGMENT OF 31. 1. 1979 — CASE 34/78

Tokyo undertook to limit exportation to Community to contribute inter alia to Italy of slide fasteners and components the harmonious development of world of those slide fasteners of Japanese manu- trade and the progressive abolition of facture and to inform the Commission restrictions on international trade, quarterly of the value of exports to Italy objectives which are recommended in the of Japanese-manufactured slide fasteners. preamble to the Treaty and in Articles 18 and 29 thereof. On the other hand, considering that "imports into the Community of slide Measures leading to or likely to lead to fasteners, particularly of Japanese origin, restrictions on the international division

have increased considerably in recent of labour and in world trade based

(c) Infringement of Article 110 of the Treaty

Yoshida Nederland B.V. maintains that

Regulation No 2067/77 infringes Article 110 of the Treaty which obliges the

YOSHIDA KAMER VAN KOOPHANDEL EN FABRIEKEN VOOR FRIESLAND

(b) Restrictions on exports from the (e) Carelessness in adopting Regulation EEC No 2067/77

A certificate of origin within the The regulation shows that the meaning of Articles 9 and 10 of Regu- Commission has no precise idea of the lation No 802/68 is often required when manufacturing process or of the goods are exported to third countries; in economic significance of the various that case, Regulation No 2067/77 leads stages thereof, as the officials of the Commission have never visited its to a restriction on exports from the Community and the construction by the factory. YKK group of a slider factory in the By failing to take the necessary care in EEC is intended to compensate for the adopting the regulation the Commission damage which has been caused to has infringed a rule of law which must exports by that regulation. be complied with in the application of the EEC Treaty. It therefore seems that Regulation No 2067/77 is protectionist in nature. (f) Linguistic differences

However, Yoshida Nederland B.V. The plaintiff concludes that each of the suspects that the Commission infringed grounds put forward should lead to a those procedural rules and in particular declaration that Commission Regulation added to Article 1 of the English version No 2067/77 is invalid.

of Regulation No 2067/77 the words "or other interlocking elements" after the word "scoops".

JUDGMENT OF 31. 1. 1979 — CASE 34/78

B — Observations submitted by the "(a) The first phase consists in the manu- Commission facture of a certain number of semi- finished products from raw The Commission observes that because materials such as crude oil, iron of a considerable increase in imports of ore, cotton and linen: slide fasterners into the Community, — yarn particularly from Japan, it established — metal or synthetic strips surveillance over those imports and adopted Regulation No 646/75 of 13 — metal ingots or plastic blocks. March 1975 (Official Journal L 67 of 14 (b) These semi-finished products then March 1975, p. 21). undergo a certain number of processes or operations from which This regulation made the putting into the components of the slide fastener free circulation of slide fasteners and are obtained: their parts subject to production of an import document; Article 4 provides that — Tapes are woven from the yarn the origin of the product under which are specially designed for Community surveillance must be the slide fasteners and sewing established by a certificate of origin. This thread may be produced which regulation is valid until 31 December is used to place the scoops onto 1978. those tapes;

YOSHIDA KAMER VAN KOOPHANDEL EN FABRIEKEN VOOR FRIESLAND

(c) Finally, the slide fastener properly version of the preliminary draft did not so-called is assembled as follows: have exactly the same meaning as the terms used in other languages. The word — The scoops formed are affixed "scoop" might in fact give the to two parallel tapes of the impression that it did not apply to plastic desired length so that a spirals. The Irish delegate declared that continuous strip is obtained with hooks affixed for a certain he was of the same opinion but the delegates of the other Member States length and at regular intervals; indicated that the words used in their — The end stops and the slider are language referred both to metal slide placed on each part of the slide fasteners and to slide fasteners made fastener to which the scoops or from synthetic spirals. For this reason the other interlocking elements have Commission decided to adapt the been attached; English version so as to make the — The strip thus obtained is then expression used there exactly equivalent divided by cutting it between to the expression used in the other the parts to which the scoops languages and to adopt in the English have been attached so as to version the words " scoops and other obtain individual slide fasteners. interlocking elements".

(d) Treatment such as dyeing or edging Finally, the vote of the Committee on may take place at different stages of Origin on the Commission's draft the production process according to revealed that it could not be approved or the type of fastener and to the rejected by a qualified majority, with the process devised by the manu- result that no opinion was delivered. facturer. The Commission then sent a proposal to the Council in accordance with the (e) Generally the very last stage provisions of Article 14 (3) (b) of Regu- consists of packing the product for transport and/or distribution." lation No 802/68. This proposal differs from the draft submitted to the

Commission Regulation No 2067/77 setting-up of a Committee on Origin aims to draw up rules on the application consisting of representatives of the of Article 5 of Regulation No 802/68 Member States with a representative of and gives a Community interpretation of the Commission acting as chairman. the concept of "origin of goods" where When the Committee does not reach a it is necessary to determine the origin of uniform opinion on the way in which slide fasteners. Article 5 should be applied the This Community interpretation was Commission uses the power conferred necessary, because of the differences in upon it by Article 14 and initiates the implementation noted, so as to achieve procedure provided for in that article by uniform application 'of the Common submitting to the Committee draft Customs Tariff and of the measures of provisions containing the interpretation commercial policy applicable to slide and the application of the provision laid fasteners regardless of the place in which down in Article 5 to the product concerned. those measures are applied and of the authority applying them. The Commission has already adopted This uniform application is also desirable twelve regulations complying with those in respect of the grant of certificates by objectives. The power to adopt "pro- the Member States where they are visions necessary for the application of Article 5 concerning the determination of required by the importing State and where they involve the grant of certain the origin of the goods" is conferred on the Commission by the Council under advantages. Article 14 of the same regulation, Regu- It is also very important for the lation No 802/68, in accordance with definition of the concept of "origin of the fourth indent of Article 155 of the goods" to be clear and to enable the EEC Treaty. bodies authorized to grant certificates of However, the provisions concerning the origin to apply it uniformly. application of Article 5 should not make Article 5 of Regulation No 802/68 of the any amendment to the rules laid down Council was deliberately drafted in very by that article. vague terms because it must be able to apply to very different products whose The legal validity of Regulation No processing and working has been carried 2067/77 out in several countries. In view of the

representing an important stage of manu- Commission considered that it was appro- facture was performed in the territory of priate and desirable for practical reasons the Community. to consider that stages are as a whole "If therefore it is established that the last necessary for the grant of a certificate of "Community origin". This concept substantial process or operation has not corresponds moreover to the "rules on or has not entirely been performed in a origin" existing in respect of slide specific country the product in question fasteners in preferential agreements cannot be regarded as Originating in that entered into by the Community with country' even if all the stages prior to third countries. (See for example the that last process were performed in that agreement entered into between the country." Community and the Republic of Austria, The Commission observes that within the Official Journal, English Special Edition limits laid down by Article 14 in 1972 (31 December) p. 4 et seq.). In fact conjunction with Article 5 it has a in accordance with Article 2 thereof, certain freedom of discretion. Within Regulation No 802/68 does not affect those limits it may decide which trade between the Community and the operations do or do not come within the countries with which there are last substantial process or operation agreements which derogate from the within the meaning of Article 5 and by most-favoured-nation clause. Generally, making the choice it made it did not in such agreements themselves contain rules any case exceed those limits. determining the origin of goods which Within that margin, which is very do not generally differ much from those narrow, it was unable to consider the laid down in Regulation No 802/68. weaving of the tapes as forming part of The Commission considers that it has

determining the origin of tape recorders As regards measures having an effect (Official Journal, English Special Edition equivalent to a quantitative restriction, 1971 (I), p. 243) — is to choose as the although it is correct that the Court country of origin of a slide fastener the (judgment of 11 July 1974 in Case 8/74, country in which the value of the Procureur du Roi v Benoît and Gustave

operations performed there represents a Dassonville [1974] ECR 837) defined minimum percentage (for example 45%) them as all rules enacted by Member of the ex-works invoice price of the States which are capable of hindering, finished products. directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community trade, the However, that "percentage rule" cannot, objective and result of the rule chosen by according to the Commission, be taken the Commission in accordance with into consideration unless it is impossible Article 5 of Regulation No 802/68 is to to determine what the last substantial ensure uniform application in all the process or operation is; this was possible Member States of the concept of "origin in the present case because the manu- of goods" and thus to avoid "deflections facture of the slider constitutes such an of trade and abuses" (judgment given in important stage that in comparison with Case 49/76). it all the other processes or operations Finally, it is necessary to state that the are of much less importance. determination of the origin of goods plays a minor rôle in intra-Community (2) The incompatibility with Article 30 trade. of the EEC Treaty According to the Commission it is The Commission recalls that, according impossible therefore to speak of the to the plaintiff in the main action, Regu- incompatibility of Regulation No 2067/77 with Article 30. lation No 2067/77 must be considered

product. process or operation.

In view of those provisions and in (6) Infringement of essential procedural particular Articles 8 and 10 it is requirements impossible for a regulation adopted under Regulation No 802/68 to re- It has already been indicated that the establish differentiations according to the only amendments made to the provisions Member States. submitted to the Committee on Origin and then to the Council were adap- (5) Inadequate statement of reasons for tations necessitated for the conversion Regulation No 2067/77 from a Council regulation to a Commission regulation. The Commission The Commission considers that it has considers that it therefore complied with complied with the requirements laid Article 14 of Regulation No 802/68 and down in Article 190 of the Treaty as has not infringed any essential pro- specified by the Court (judgment of 4 cedural requirement. It refers in July 1963 in Case 24/62, Government of particular to the need to exercise its the Federal Republic of Germany v power under Article 14 (3) (c). Commission of the EEC'[1963] ECR 63) by mentioning in the recitals of the (7) Carelessness in the preparation of preamble to Regulation No 2067/77 Regulation No 2067/77 the four main considerations which

1974 in Case 6/74, Johannes Coenrad does not merely quote one of the Moulijn v Commission of the European possibilities. This interpretation is Communities [1974] ECR 1287). moreover confirmed by the recital of the preamble in which it is stated that the (9) Misuse ofpowers operations mentioned constitute the last substantial process or operation resulting The plaintiff maintains that the in the manufacture of a new product or Commission adopted Regulation No representing an important stage of manu- 2067/77 to make its sale of slide facture. fasteners "more difficult" where that sale Since, in accordance with Article 5 of is subject to the grant of a certificate of Regulation No 802/68, only that origin certifying that the slide fastener operation determines the origin of the originates in a Member State of the goods, it follows that on the one hand European Communities. other operations cannot have that result The Commission strongly denies that it and that on the other the whole of that pursued such an objective but it observes last substantial process must be moreover that to make it "more performed in the country of origin. difficult" supposes that before the regu- A different interpretation would be lation the matter was easier. However, incorrect since Regulation No 2067/77 according to the Commission, it follows merely constitutes a measure adopted in clearly from Article 5 of Regulation No implementation of Regulation No 802/68 which requires, for the purposes 802/68 whose objective is to ensure of certifying that goods originate in a uniform application inter alia of the country, that the last substantial process Common Customs Tariff; this would not has taken place in that country, that the be the case if several operations could slider must be manufactured in the each by itself enable the origin of the country of origin. This operation thus no goods to be determined. doubt formed part of the last substantial process or operation. If therefore certi- The second part of the first question ficates were granted to the plaintiff concerns the field of application of the declaring that the slide fasteners in regulation. The table concerns the question were of Community origin "products obtained" coming within tariff when the slider was manufactured in heading 98.02 of the Common Customs Japan this was the result of an incorrect Tariff with the description "slide fasteners". interpretation of Article 5. The difficulties which arose were not

which constitute as a whole the last the characteristic features of a slide

substantial process or operation fastener are the system of closure by within the meaning of Article 5 of means of scoops or nylon spirals by Regulation (EEC) No 802/68 of the means of the action of a slider. Only Council, may be regarded as the those factors enable a new product to country of origin of a slide fastener. result and represent an important stage of manufacture. Dyeing, cutting and 2. Commission Regulation (EEC) No assembly are only secondary operations 2067/77 is applicable to all slide which do not give the product its specific fasteners coming within tariff character. heading 98.02 of the Common For those reasons the French Customs Tariff whether they contain Government considers that the criteria of small metal components in the form of scoops or interlocking nylon origin adopted by the Commission spirals. comply with the conditions laid down in Article 5 of Regulation No 802/68 and 3. The above-mentioned regulation that the refusal by the Kammer van constitutes a correct application of Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Friesland Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No to grant the certificates of origin to 802/68 of the Council and is not Yoshida Nederland B.V. is in accordance incompatible with either Article 30 with the provisions of Regulation No or with Article 110 of the Treaty 2067/77. establishing the EEC and must not be regarded as invalid for any other reason." E — Observations submitted by the Italian Government

C — Observations submitted by the The Italian Government observes that Netherlands Government Regulation No 2067/77 does not aim to prevent the sale in Europe of what is The Netherlands Government observes objectively "Japanese" but is intended that the undertaking established in Sneek only to prevent goods which are for the manufacture of slide fasteners objectively Japanese from being able to includes operations inter alia performed disguise themselves as European goods. by special machines which incontestably constitute a "last substantial process or operation that is economically justified

Decision

1 By order of 10 March 1978 received at the Court Registry on 14 March 1978 the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven referred to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty three questions on the interpretation and validity of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2067/77 of 20 September 1977 concerning the determination of the origin of slide fasteners (Official Journal L 242 of 21 September 1977, p. 5).

2 These questions have been raised within the context of a dispute between a Netherlands subsidiary of the Japanese Yoshida Kogyo KK group which owns a factory in Sneek in which it produces metal and nylon slide fasteners, the sliders for which are manufactured in Japan, and the Kamer van

YOSHIDA KAMER VAN KOOPHANDEL EN FABRIEKEN VOOR FRIESLAND

Koophandel en Fabriek voor Friesland (the Chamber of Commerce and Manufacture of Friesland) which refused, in application of Regulation No 2067/77, to grant it a certificate of origin certifying that those slide fasteners are of Netherlands or Community origin, on the ground that the sliders used in the manufacture of the slide fasteners had not been manufactured in "the

Netherlands or elsewhere in the European Economic Community".

It is clear from the file and in particular from the observations of the defendant in the main action that there is no doubt that the final assembly of the slide fasteners constitutes an "operation that is economically justified" and is carried out in an undertaking which is "remarkably well-equipped and which has modern machines and a large staff".

JUDGMENT OF 31. 1. 1978 — CASE 34/78

Thus the problem is essentially whether the provisions of Regulation No 2067/77 conferring on goods the status of products originating in the country in which assembly took place including placing of the scoops or other interlocking elements onto the tapes accompanied by the manufacture of the slider and the forming of the scoops or other interlocking elements do not exceed the limits of the discretion of the Commission to adopt implementing provisions in this field under Article 14 of Regulation No 802/68.

6 To reply to this question it is necessary to inquire as to the circumstances in which Regulation No 2067/77 came into being and was then drawn up and finally to interpret it having regard to the technical operations resulting in the manufacture of slide fasteners.

7 In 1975 the Commission found that imports into the Community of slide fasteners, particularly of Japanese origin, had increased considerably in recent years and that those developments threatened to cause injury to Community producers of like products and therefore introduced on 13 March Regulation (EEC) No 646/75 establishing Community surveillance over imports of slide fasteners (Official Journal L 67 of 14 March 1975, p. 21).

9 It is therefore necessary to examine whether those operations correspond to the requirements laid down in Article 5 of Regulation No 802/68 and may be interpreted as constituting the last substantial process or operation resulting in the manufacture of the slide fastener or representing an important stage of manufacture. This is a question of a technical nature which must be examined having regard to the definition of a slide fastener and of the various operations resulting in its formation.

10 The characteristic feature of the finished product known as a slide fastener is that two flexible tapes to which scoops or other interlocking elements are attached in parallel staggered formation can be opened or closed by means of the action of a slider.

It follows from the file that the process of the manufacture of slide fasteners which takes place at the undertaking in Sneek is composed of the following main operations as described by the national court:

(a) the weaving of the tapes and where necessary the trimming and dyeing of them;

(b) the stamping of the metal scoops or the production of the spirals from nylon thread;

(c) the attaching of the metal scoops or nylon spirals to the tapes and the subsequent joining of the tapes; (d) the attaching of bottoms stops and top stops; (e) the insertion and where necessary the colouring of the sliders;

13 Consequently, without its being necessary to examine whether the provisions of Regulation No 2067/77 are compatible with Articles 30 and 110 of the EEC Treaty, it is necessary to state that Article 1 of Commission Regulation No 2067/77 of 20 September 1977 concerning the determination of the origin of slide fasteners is invalid. Since Regulation No 2067/77 has been held to be invalid for the abovementioned reasons, the other questions have become purposeless.

Costs

14 The costs incurred by the Commission and by the Governments of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the French Republic and the Italian Republic which submitted observations to the Court are not recoverable and since the

proceedings are, in so far as the parties to the main action are concerned, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court.

YOSHIDA KAMER VAN KOOPHANDEL EN FABRIEKEN VOOR FRIESLAND

THE COURT,

A. Van Houtte H. Kutscher

Registrar President

OPINION OF MR ADVOCATE GENERAL CAPOTORTI DELIVERED ON 13 DECEMBER 1978 <apnote>1</apnote>

Mr President, the Common Customs Tariff, as well as Members of the Court, for the purposes of the issue of certifi- cates of origin for goods exported to 1. The concept of the origin of goods is third countries. The Council therefore

relevant in the Community context for provides by Regulation No (EEC) the purposes of the application of certain 802/68 of the Council of 27 June 1968 provisions concerning trade, and in for the introduction of a common

particular of certain rules laid down in definition of that concept to solve the