European Court busy

Press, 28 October 1981, Page 34

European Court busy

NZPA-Reuter Luxemburg The 11 judges of the European Court of Justice in Luxemburg face the unenviable task of helping to turn back a strong tide of trade protectionism in the European Economic Community. With disputes over obstacles to free trade between the 10 E.E.C. members growing in frequency and bitterness, the judges are having a hard time keeping the member states within the law. They are burdened with a never-ending stream of complaints, from companies against companies, from one E.E.C. institution against another, and from one country against another. Free trade is enshrined as an aim in the Treaty of Rome, which established the Common Market in 1958. But according to the E.E.C.’s executive, the European Commission, far from disappearing as the community develops, trade barriers are springing up all the time. France narrowly missed having to defend its restric- ' tiOns on Italian wine imports in the European Court when it resolved the “wine war” recently. But Britain seems

set for an appearance in the dock unless it lifts import curbs on poultry which have caused a row with France and the Netherlands. As far as the Commission is concerned, these public disputes are . merely the tip of the iceberg. The E.E.C.’s Commissioner for Internal Trade, Mr KarlHeinz Narjes, said that twenty-three years after the Treaty of Rome the community still faced growing internal protectionism. About 180 abuses of the E.E.C.’s trade laws had been spotted so far this year and a total of about 400 potential cases was still outstanding. They included anything from obstructive customs formalities and discriminatory taxes to the protectionist use of health regulations. E.E.C. sources said that many of these cases, if they were found to be actual violations of the rules, could come before the Court. But officials said that the Court, hampered by cumbersome bureaucratic procedures and the complications of working in seven different languages, already had more than enough work to do.

Between 1974 and 1980 the number of decisions handed down annually by the Court increased from 62 to 132, not including cases it only considered or left pending. Cases before the Court rarely last less than nine months and are getting longer. A source of the Court said that paperwork involved in its deliberations had been known to reach 8000 pages for one case. Much of the Court’s time was taken up with cases brought against E.E.C. bodies by their heavily unionised employees. In one case a man who had suffered a bump on his head during working hours had called 23 doctors to testify on his behalf. An official said, “There is a large body of opinion that some of the top judges from the member states should not have to spend their time considering a bump on a man’s head.” As far back as 1978 the Court told E.E.C. ministers that it needed more staff to cope with its mounting workload. Since then the E.E.C. has been enlarged by the entry of Greece and the

prospect of Spanish and Portuguese membership has come several steps closer. , The Court’s work is not made easier by the fact that, in disputes between member states, it has found difficulty in asserting its authority. Some officials see a danger that as protectionist pressures mount still further within the E.E.C. there will be increasing temptation to flout the court’s rulings, as France did two years ago. Although the Court’s word is largely respected in cases involving commercial companies, which form its staple diet, the Court has no real sanctions that it can use against member states who break the law. Richard Plender, a barrister who works with the Court, said, “The Court has no means of enforcement apart from its moral authority” In the “lamb war” of 1979, the Court ordered France to remove restrictions on the import of British sheepmeat but France simply refused to comply. Officials said that Italy was one of the community’s most persistently errant

members and frequently appeared as a defendant before the Court. When it does the results tend to follow a routine formula, which, one official said, went as follows, “The Court formally asks Italy to comply with a regulation, Italy assures the Court it has made every effort to do so but has failed because of its political crisis, the Commission brings an action, the Court judges, nothing happens.” Should any member leave the E.E.C. — and Britain’s Labour Party is committed to taking the country out of the Community if it gains power in the next General Election — the burden on the Court could become even greater. Mr i Plender said the Court would therefore probably have to oversee the gradual imposition of tariff barriers against the country which had left the Community and would have to handle the suspension of concessionary loans, the return of workers living as privileged residents in the E.E.C., and a change in arrangements for British companies.