1 ON 13 FEBRUARY 1984 THE APPLICANT BROUGHT AN ACTION CLAIMING THAT COMMISSION DECISION NO 3717/83/ECSC OF 23 DECEMBER 1983 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL 1983 , L 373 , P . 9 ), A GENERAL DECISION INTRODUCING FOR STEEL UNDERTAKINGS AND STEEL DEALERS A PRODUCTION CERTIFICATE AND AN ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENT FOR DELIVERIES OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS , SHOULD BE DECLARED VOID .
2 AT THE SAME TIME THE APPLICANT APPLIED PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 39 OF THE ECSC TREATY FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF THAT DECISION .
3 THE APPLICANT ARGUES IN ITS MAIN APPLICATION THAT DECISION NO 3717/83 REPRESENTS A MISUSE OF POWERS . THE DECLARED OBJECTIVE OF THE DECISION IS TO PERMIT A FULL AND EXACT SURVEY OF PATTERNS OF DELIVERIES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AS A BASIS FOR RELIABLE STATISTICS , WHEREAS THE TRUE OBJECTIVE , ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT , IS DIFFERENT . THE DECISION IS THE FIRST STEP IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A POLICY ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF FREEZING TRADITIONAL PATTERNS OF TRADE , CONTRARY TO THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF A COMMON MARKET AND OF THE FREE ACCESS OF USERS TO THE SOURCES OF PRODUCTION .
4 THE APPLICANT ARGUES THAT THE COMMISSION ACTED CONTRARY TO THE RULES OF THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE BALANCE OF POWERS BETWEEN THE INSTITUTIONS , INASMUCH AS IT COMPLIED WITH THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL WHICH , BY CARRYING OUT TASKS ENTRUSTED TO THE COMMISSION , USURPED ITS ROLE .
5 THE APPLICANT CLAIMS THAT THE COMMISSION IS ALSO GUILTY OF A MISUSE OF POWERS IN ADOPTING A DECISION WHICH IN FACT ALLOWS MEMBER STATES TO OBTAIN MORE ACCURATE INFORMATION ON TRADE PATTERNS IN THEIR OWN INTEREST RATHER THAN IN THAT OF THE COMMISSION .
6 THE APPLICANT ARGUES THAT THERE IS ALSO URGENCY INASMUCH AS THE VERY EXISTENCE OF THE MONITORING SYSTEM INTRODUCED BY THE CONTESTED DECISION HAD A DISSUASIVE EFFECT ON STEEL UNDERTAKINGS .
7 ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 39 OF THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY , ACTIONS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT DO NOT HAVE SUSPENSORY EFFECT . THE COURT MAY , HOWEVER , IF IT CONSIDERS THAT CIRCUMSTANCES SO REQUIRE , ORDER THAT APPLICATION OF THE CONTESTED DECISION BE SUSPENDED . IT MAY ALSO PRESCRIBE ANY OTHER NECESSARY INTERIM MEASURES .
8 ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 83 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE , THE COURT MAY SUSPEND THE OPERATION OF A MEASURE OR GRANT OTHER INTERIM MEASURES ONLY WHERE THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES GIVING RISE TO URGENCY AND FACTUAL AND LEGAL GROUNDS ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR THE INTERIM MEASURES APPLIED FOR .
9 ACCORDING TO THE COMMISSION ' S EXPLANATIONS , THE INFORMATION WHICH IT HAD AT ITS DISPOSAL BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF THE CONTESTED DECISION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING WHETHER THERE HAD BEEN BREACHES OF THE RULES OF THE TREATY , IN PARTICULAR BREACHES OF PRICING RULES , OF THE RULES PROHIBITING AID AND OF COMPETITION RULES , CONSISTED EITHER OF STATISTICS ON DELIVERIES MADE BY PRODUCERS WITHIN THE COMMON MARKET , COLLECTED PURSUANT TO DECISION NO 3483/82 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 378 , 23 . 12 . 1982 ), OR OF CUSTOMS STATISTICS PROVIDED BY THE MEMBER STATES . THOSE STATISTICS DID NOT AGREE , INTER ALIA BECAUSE DEALERS WERE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE DELIVERY STATISTICS . THE COLLECTION OF MORE RELIABLE INFORMATION ON MOVEMENTS OF STEEL PRODUCTS WAS INDISPENSABLE FOR THE SUPERVISION OF THE MARKET .
10 WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY NEED TO CONSIDER THE OBJECTIONS WHICH THE APPLICANT RAISES AGAINST THE MEASURES TAKEN AND THE QUESTION WHETHER ITS CONTENT IS JUSTIFIED , IT MUST BE HELD THAT IT IS NOT URGENT AT THIS STAGE TO ORDER ITS SUSPENSION .
11 THE DECISION IN QUESTION DOES NO MORE THAN REQUIRE THE UNDERTAKINGS CONCERNED TO PRODUCE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS WHICH MAKE IT POSSIBLE TO FOLLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTRA-COMMUNITY TRADE . TAKEN BY ITSELF SUCH A MEASURE IS NOT LIKELY TO INFLUENCE THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE UNDERTAKINGS IN QUESTION IN THE AREA OF PRODUCTION AND SALES . CONSEQUENTLY , ITS CONTINUED OPERATION PENDING THE COURT ' S DECISION ON THE ACTION FOR A DECLARATION OF NULLITY IS NOT LIKELY TO CAUSE HARM TO THE APPLICANT UNDERTAKINGS SO AS TO JUSTIFY SUSPENSION OF ITS OPERATION .
ON THOSE GROUNDS ,
THE COURT ,
BY WAY OF INTERIM DECISION ,
HEREBY ORDERS AS FOLLOWS :
1 . THE APPLICATION IS DISMISSED ;
2 . THE COSTS ARE RESERVED .
