Luxembourg, 29/10/2002 (Agence Europe) - A Member State has two months after the adoption of a Commission decision in which to challenge the validity of that decision before the Court of Justice. France had therefore two months in which to dispute the validity of two decisions on lifting the embargo on British beef, taken by the Commission in 1998 and 1999. It was ruled, in substance by the European Court of Justice in the National Farmers' Union case, that France could not contest the decisions outside the period set, through court action, in France, opposing it to the British National Farmers' Union.
The Court ruled in a thirteen judge formation (with Finnish Judge Allan Rosas as rapporteur), which, the experts say, shows the importance given to this affair.
When the British farmers had attacked France before the "Conseil d'Etat"¸ the French government had challenged the validity of the Commission's decision to lift the embargo. It had more or less stated that it could not be asked to apply the 1998 and 1999 decisions seeing that they were invalid, and that it now has proof of a case of BSE, among other things, in 2000, in an animal born after 1996.
The "Conseil d'Etat" gives a negative response. "A decision adopted by the Community institutions which has not been challenged by its addressee within the time-limit laid down … becomes definitive", it explains. Furthermore, it specifies that, "if a Member State takes the view that new factors give rise to an obligation for the Commission to adopt a fresh decision, it is for that State to follow the procedures prescribed by the Treaty". The Court also states that, for legal reasons, France could not invoke public health reasons for opposing resumed imports.
With this ruling, the National Farmers' Union can thus brandish the Commission's decision to lift the embargo and demand that the French government conform to that decision. British farmers may thus claim the 5000 FF per day penalty fixed for each day that the embargo is not lifted.
Pending the French interministerial order
The interministerial order which, in France, should allow imports of British meat to be resumed, has still not been published. This has two consequences from the judiciary point of view: the proceedings concerning the National Farmers' Union before the "Conseil d'Etat" continue; and the action taken by the Commission against France with, into the bargain, penalties for not having lifted the embargo, is still on the agenda since the hearing of the parties before the Court has just taken place. Advocate Mischo is to give his conclusions on 5 November.