Nold stop

The judgment returned the May 14th 1974 in the business J. Nold, Kohlen- und Baustoffgroßhandlung against Commission of the European Communities (or more simply Stop Nold , business 4/73) by the Court of justice of the European Communities (or CJCE) is one of the bases of the Jurisprudence of the Community legislation. This stop poses the principle of the respect by the Communities of the basic rights, as subscribed and defined by Member States in their constitutional traditions.

These human rights thus make integral part of the general principles of the Right whose Court must ensure the respect (when bien-même they would not be explicitly registered in Traités): if the CJCE confirms the primacy of the Community legislation on the national rights, this one is in fact limited by the respect of a " common base of valeurs" (inter alia, the European Convention of the human rights). Reciprocally, the general interest defended by the Communities could not however be subordinate to particular economic interests.

Facts

In a decision of the December 21st 1972, the European commission authorizes new rules of sale for the company of Charbonnage S Ruhrkohle AG. This one can from now on subordinate the coal sale to the concluding of two year old contracts minimum, and this for a minimal volume of 6 000 ton S per annum.

The company J. Nold, Kohlen- und Baustoffgroßhandlung, small wholesaler operating primarily bound for the private individuals, is estimated consequently injured by this decision, its volumes of sale being well in-on this side quantities required. It thus attacks the Commission in front of the CJCE to claim cancellation of it, with the reason in particular that its basic rights would be violated, its exclusion of the market of coal putting its economic activity in danger.

The decision of the CJCE

On the business

The Court answers that if the basic rights are well defended by the nelles traditions Constitution of the Member States, the defense of those could not apply (or be subordinated) to the private interests of the survival of only one company, because I) the new imposed conditions are equal for all the customers from Ruhrkohle and II) in a normal economic context, it is with the company to adapt to the market rates (which defines the general interest there), rather than the reverse.

The complaint is thus rejected.

Basic rights

This decision makes following the stops Stauder and Internationale Handelsgesellschaft, in which the Court evokes for the first time the “basic rights of the person including the general principles of the Community legislation, whose Court ensures the respect”. The protection of the human rights must consequently “be assured within the framework the structure of the objectives of the Community”. These stops devote the recognition of the basic rights like general principles, that the Court of justice must protect in the field narrowed from Community competences; pragmatic manner to reduce the Democratic deficit from which suffered already at the time the Communities.

Consequently, while referring for the first time explicitly at the international instruments of protection of the human rights (here, the European Convention of the human rights), the Court benefits from this decision to reaffirm in a clear way the duty of protection of the communities with respect to their citizens: " the Court is held to take as a starting point the constitutional traditions common to the Member States and could not, consequently, admit measurements incompatible with the basic rights recognized and guaranteed by the Constitutions of these States " (idiots. 13).

This stop many times will be confirmed and refined thereafter, in particular by the means of the stops Rutili, Hauer and Wachauf.

Random links: