José Arantzamendi-Osa and others v Procureur de la République and Procureur général (13/82, 14/82, 15/82, 16/82, 17/82, 18/82, 19/82, 20/82, 21/82, 22/82, 23/82, 24/82, 25/82, 26/82, 27/82, 28/82)

I —Facts and written procedure

II —Summary of the written observations submitted to the Court

The French Government remarks that the circumstances in Cases 14 to 27/82 are the same as those considered by the Court in its judgment of 8 December 1981 (Crujeiras Tome and Yurrita, Joined Cases 180 and 266/80, [1981] ECR 2997) in which the Court stated that “the interim regime established by the Community under its own rules falls within the framework of the relations established between the Community and Spain in order to resolve the problems inherent in conservation measures and the extension of fishery zones and in order to ensure reciprocal access by fishermen to the waters subject to such measures” and that “those relations were substituted for the regime which previously applied in those zones ...” (paragraph 18 of the decision). The French Government proposes that the Court should restrict itself to confirming that decision and consequently rule that, with regard to Cases 14 to 27/82, consideration of the question raised has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of the regulations at issue and that the provisions of those regulations are enforceable against Spanish nationals.With regard to Cases 13 and 28/82, the facts of which occurred in a period for which no regulation made provision for the issue of licences to Spanish fishermen, the French Government points out that Council Regulation (EEC) No 554/81 of 27 February 1981 (Official Journal L 37, p. 1) states in the fifth recital in the preamble thereto that fishing by Community vessels in the fishing zones of Member States was “authorized, during the period 1 to 31 January 1981 by Regulation (EEC) No 3305/80” but that “such fishing has been interrupted since 1 February 1981”. Such fishing thus could not lawfully be resumed until the entry into force of the said Regulation No 554/81, that is to say on 4 March 1981.In this connection the French Government refers furthermore to the observations which it submitted in Case 137/81, which gave rise to the same problem.The Council of the European Communities states first of all that the facts at issue in the present cases occurred between 14 January 1980 and 14 February 1981, that is during a period beginning shortly before the signature of the Agreement on Fisheries between the EEC and Spain and terminating while it was provisionally applicable.As the Council has previously indicated, it does not consider that Spanish fishermen may rely upon prior international obligations as against the application of the Community regulations in question. The close collaboration of the Spanish authorities with the Community throughout the time when the Agreement was being negotiated shows tacit acceptance, whilst signature of the Agreement shows express acceptance, of the new reciprocal relations between the Community and Spain in the field of fisheries. With regard to Cases 14 to 27/82 the Council consequently suggests that the judgment of 8 December 1981 cited above should be followed.With regard to the period between 1 February and 3 March 1981 in which the facts at issue in Cases 13 and 28/82 took place the Council refers to its observations in Case 137/81 and claims that the Community rules did not provide any possibility for Spanish fishermen to obtain a licence since relations between the Community and Spain concerning fishing were interrupted. That interruption nevertheless did not entail freedom to fish since French legislation expressly prohibits fishing in territorial waters and the economic zone except with an authorization granted in accordance with Community law.Because of a disagreement between the Community and Spain on the number of licences and on the volume of quotas it was impossible to determine the arrangements for 1981 either in December 1980 or in January 1981. In this connection the Council refers to a note verbale of the Commission of 23 December 1980 addressed to the Mission of Spain to the European Communities in which the Commission emphasized the need to conclude the reciprocal consultations in sufficient time to enable a regulation to be adopted before 1 February 1981 giving effect to the outcome of the consultations in order to avoid interrupting fishing by Spanish vessels in the fishing zone of the Community. When the consultations were finally concluded on 17 February 1981 Regulation No 554/81 was quickly adopted.The Commission of the European Communities also suggests that, with regard to Cases 14 to 27/82, the Court should follow the judgment of 8 December 1981 in Joined Cases 180 and 266/80 cited above.It considers furthermore that the solution, which is based on the replacement by the interim measures resulting from the new relationship between Spain and the Community of the rules previously applicable in the fishing zones in order to take account of the evolution of international law, may be adopted as such in Cases 13 and 28/82. The fact that the Court has found that the new regime replaced the former rules also justifies the suspension of fishing by Spanish vessels between 1 February and 3 March 1981 in the fishing zone of the Community.In fact, the new relations between the Community and Spain resulted in the conclusion and application of a framework agreement on fisheries and, in accordance with the rules of the new Law of the Sea, they entail in particular mutual recognition of the power of each of the parties to take measures for the protection of resources in the exclusive fishing zone extending to 200 miles. The requirement that Spanish fishermen should hold a licence or the suspension of their fishing operations thus constitute means of exercising the general powers of the Community in its exclusive fishing zone. In that connection the Commission further states that no provision of the Draft Convention on the Law of the Sea which was drawn up at the Third Conference on the Law of the Sea and which gives expression to the new customary law, contemplates the maintenance or recognition of historical rights or traditional fishing by nationals of other States within the exclusive economic zone.In the light of the framework agreement concluded between the Community and Spain which has been applied provisionally since 15 April 1980 the Commission considers that the Community was entitled to suspend fishing by Spanish vessels in the absence of agreement by the Spanish authorities to the proposed conditions. By notes verbales of 23 December 1980 and of 30 January 1981 it pointed out to the Spanish delegation the need to complete in good time the consultations on the fishing arrangements for 1981 and, following the suspension of consultations by the Spanish delegation, it also informed the latter of the interruption of fishing by Spanish vessels as from 31 January 1981. It is accordingly Spain which is responsible for the suspension of the consultations and thus of the issue of the licences.Finally, having regard to the power of the Community to take measures for the conservation of resources, which extends to all maritime waters falling under the jurisdiction of the Member States, not only the Community regulations at issue in the present cases but also the prohibition of all fishing during the period from 1 February to 3 March 1981 may be enforced against Spanish nationals.

III —Oral procedure

At the sitting on 16 September 1982 oral argument was presented by the following: Bernard Botte, Attache at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, acting as Agent, for the Government of the French Republic; Daniel Vignes, Director in the Legal Department of the Council, acting as Agent, for the Council of the European Communities and François Lamoureux, a member of the legal Department of the Commission, acting as Agent, for the Commission of the European Communities.The Advocate General delivered his opinion at the sitting on 6 October 1982.

Costs