C-241/78
ECLI:EU:C:1981:156
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61978CO0241
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
ORDER OF THE COURT OF 1 JULY 1981 1
DGV Deutsche Getreideverwertung und Rheinische Kraftfutterwerke GmbH and Others y European Economic Community
Joined Cases 241, 242 and 246 to 249/78
In Joined Cases
241/78 D G V DEUTSCHE GETREIDEVERWERTUNG UND RHEINISCHE KRAFT- FUTTERWERKE G M B H ,
242/78 WERHAHN HANSAMÜHLE,
246/78 SPRL MASELIS FRÈRES,
247/78 CODRICO BV,
248/78 HANSA-LAGERHAUS STRÖH,
249/78 BV MEELFABRIEK WEERT,
applicants, ν
EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY,
represented by its institutions :
1. Council of the European Communities,
2. Commission of the European Communities,
defendant,
APPLICATIONS under Article 178 and the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EEC Treaty,
1 — Language of the Case: German.
ORDER OF 1. 7. 1981 — JOINED CASES 241, 242 AND 246 TO 249/78
T H E COURT,
composed of: J. Mertens de Wilmars, President, P. Pescatore, Lord Mackenzie Stuart and ,T. Koopmans (Presidents of Chambers), A. O'Keeffe, G. Bosco, A. Touffait, O. Due, U. Everling, A. Chloros and F. Grévisse, Judges,
Advocate General: F. Capotorti Registrar: A. Van Houtte
makes the following
ORDER
Facts and procedure
1. By applications lodged at the Court 1 August 1975 to 19 October 1977, the Registry on 3 November 1978 (Cases use of maize for the production of groats 241 and 242/78) and 6 November 1978 and meal had conferred an entitlement (Cases 246 to 249/78) the applicants to the same refunds as the use of maize brought actions under Article 178 and for the manufacture of starch. the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EEC Treaty seeking an order that the defendant should pay them the 2. By an interlocutory judgment of following sums: 4 October 1979 ([1979] ECR 3017) the Court ordered the Community to pay to DM 9 425 280.50 (Case 241/78) the applicants and to the applicant in Case 250/78 Conti/ex Getreideprodukte DM 1 909 488.82 (Case 242/78) GmbH & Co. KG v Council and BFR 27 564 886 (Case 246/78) Commission, the amounts equivalent to HFL 2 551 531.63 (Case 247/78) the refunds referred to above DM 188 685.60 (Case 248/78) accompanied by interest at 6% from the date of the interlocutory judgment. The HFL 1 791 901.03 (Case 249/78) Court also ordered the parties to inform it within twelve months of the delivery of together with interest at 6% as from the the interlocutory judgment of the dates specified in the applications, such amounts of compensation arrived at by sums being, according to the applicants, agreement. equivalent to the production refunds on maize groats and meal used by the brewing industry which each of those 3. The period fixed by the Court has undertakings would have been entitled to been extended on several occasions, receive if, during the period from finally until 4 January 1981.
DGV ν EEC
4. By letters of 5 January 1981 the tions on the amount of compensation in parties informed the Court that they had Case 250/78. agreed on the amounts of compensation except in Case 250/78 but that they had 6. It appears from the aforesaid letters not been able to agree as to the costs. of 5 January 1981 that the amounts They therefore requested the Court to awarded to the applicants are as follows: adjudicate on the sharing and taxation of DM 9 178 150.25 (Case 241/78) costs. DM 1 906 485.45 (Case 242/78) BFR 25 664 103 (Case 246/78) 5. By order of 13 May 1981 Case HFL 2 509 083 (Case 247/78) 250/78 was, at the request of the DM 188 005.94 (Case 248/78) applicants, disjoined from the other cases HFL 1 716 218.55 (Case 249/78) so as to allow the Court to adjudicate on costs in the latter cases without all increased by interest at 6% as from awaiting the conclusion of the negotia 4 October 1979.
Decision
ι In view of the fact that, the parties have established the amounts of compensation by agreement, Cases 241, 242 and 246 to 249/78 must be removed from the Court Register.
2 In pursuance of Article 69 (1) of the Rules of Procedure the Court is to give a decision as to costs in its final judgment or in the order which closes the proceedings.
3 In its interlocutory judgment of 4 October 1979 ([1979] ECR 3017) in these cases the Court reserved the costs.
4 By letters of 5 January 1981 the applicants in these cases asked the Court to adjudicate on the costs recoverable.
5 The Court must therefore adjudicate on the sharing of costs in order to allow the Second Chamber to tax the recoverable costs.
ORDER OF 1. 7. 1981 — JOINED CASES 241, 242 AND 246 TO 249/78
6 Under Article 69 (2) of the Rules of Procedure the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs.
7 Under Article 69 (3) the Court may, where each party succeeds on some and fails on other heads or where the circumstances are exceptional, order the parties to bear their own costs in whole or in part.
8 It may be seen from the interlocutory judgment that the Council and the Commission were unsuccessful as regards all their legal submissions. The reductions in the amounts claimed, which were made following negotiations between the parties are not so great as to have any effect on the sharing of costs.
9 The European Economic Community must therefore be ordered to bear the whole of the costs.
On those grounds,
THE COURT
hereby orders as follows :
1. Cases 241, 242 and 246 to 249/78 are removed from the Court Register.
2. The European Economic Community shall bear the costs.
Luxembourg, 1 July 1981.
J. A. Pompe J. Mertens de Wilmars Deputy Registrar President