ECLI:EU:C:1979:189•Order of the Court of 11 July 1979.#Fédération nationale des producteurs de vins de table et vins de pays v Commission of the European Communities.#Case 60/79.
Order of the Court of 11 July 1979.#Fédération nationale des producteurs de vins de table et vins de pays v Commission of the European Communities.#Case 60/79.
ECLI:EU:C:1979:189Eu Full Court CJul 11, 1979
Full text
Parties
Grounds
Operative part
Parties
IN CASE 60/79
FEDERATION NATIONALE DES PRODUCTEURS DE VINS DE TABLE ET VINS DE PAYS
V
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Grounds
ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 91 ( 3 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE , UNLESS THE COURT OF JUSTICE DECIDES OTHERWISE THE REMAINDER OF THE PROCEEDINGS CONCERNING A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IS TO BE ORAL . THE COURT IS OF THE OPINION THAT THERE ARE NO GROUNDS FOR OPENING THE ORAL PROCEDURE AND IT HAS DECIDED , AS PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 91 ( 3 ), TO ADJUDICATE FORTHWITH UPON THE APPLICATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENTS .
THE APPLICANT ' S APPLICATION IS INADMISSIBLE .
AS FAR AS THE APPLICATION FOR THE ANNULMENT PURSUANT TO THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 173 OF THE EEC TREATY IS CONCERNED THE REGULATION IN QUESTION CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A DECISION ADDRESSED TO THE APPLICANT WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT ARTICLE OR TO BE A DECISION OF DIRECT AND INDIVIDUAL CONCERN TO IT , ALTHOUGH IN THE FORM OF A REGULATION . THE REGULATION IN QUESTION IS IN FACT PURELY LEGISLATIVE AND APPLIES TO EVERY WINE-PRODUCER IN THE COMMUNITY . MOREOVER IT SHOULD BE STRESSED THAT , AS THE COURT HAS ALREADY DECLARED , IN PARTICULAR IN ITS JUDGMENT OF 14 DECEMBER 1962 IN JOINED CASES 16 AND 17/62 ( CONFEDERATION NATIONALE DES PRODUCTEURS DE FRUITS ET DE LEGUMES AND OTHERS AND FEDERATION NATIONALE DES PRODUCTEURS DE RAISINS DE TABLE V COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY ( 1962 ) ECR 479 ), IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO ACCEPT THE PRINCIPLE THAT AN ASSOCIATION , IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF A CATEGORY OF BUSINESSMEN , IS INDIVIDUALLY CONCERNED BY A MEASURE AFFECTING THE GENERAL INTERESTS OF THAT CATEGORY . THE ACTION UNDER THIS HEAD IS THEREFORE INADMISSIBLE .
AS FAR AS THE APPLICATION UNDER ARTICLE 175 OF THE TREATY IS CONCERNED THE ONLY LEGAL INSTRUMENT WHICH MIGHT POSSIBLY MEET THE APPLICANT ' S REQUEST WOULD HAVE BEEN A REGULATION AMENDING REGULATION NO 130/79 ; AN AMENDING REGULATION OF THIS KIND CANNOT BE CLASSIFIED AS A MEASURE WHICH MAY BE ADDRESSED TO THE APPLICANT WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 175 . THE ACTION UNDER THIS HEAD IS THEREFORE ALSO INADMISSIBLE .
Operative part
ON THOSE GROUNDS ,
THE COURT
HEREBY ORDERS AS FOLLOWS :
1 . THE APPLICATION IS DISMISSED AS INADMISSIBLE .
2 . THE APPLICANT SHALL PAY THE COSTS .
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.