1 BY DECISION OF 28 NOVEMBER 1972, LODGED AT THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT ON 4 DECEMBER 1972, THE DISTRICT COURT OF BREDA UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY RAISED THE QUESTION WHETHER, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT OF THE DIRECT RIGHT AGAINST THE THIRD PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGE, REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 52 OF REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL, IT IS CORRECT TO APPLY THE RULES OF THE MEMBER STATE UNDER WHICH THIS RIGHT IS INVOKED .
2 BY ARTICLE 52 OF REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL :
" IF A PERSON BENEFITING FROM PAYMENT UNDER THE LEGISLATION OF A MEMBER STATE FOR DAMAGE SUFFERED IN THE TERRITORY OF ANOTHER STATE, HAS THE RIGHT, IN THE TERRITORY OF THAT OTHER STATE, TO CLAIM COMPENSATION FROM A THIRD PARTY FOR THAT DAMAGE, ANY RIGHTS WHICH THE INSTITUTION LIABLE TO PAY THE BENEFITS MAY HAVE AGAINST THE THIRD PARTY SHALL BE GOVERNED AS FOLLOWS : ...
( B ) WHERE THE INSTITUTION LIABLE HAS A DIRECT RIGHT AGAINST THE THIRD PARTY, EACH MEMBER STATE SHALL RECOGNIZE THAT RIGHT . "
3 IT APPEARS FROM THIS PROVISION THAT THE DIRECT RIGHT OF THE INSTITUTION LIABLE VIS-A-VIS THE THIRD PARTY RESPONSIBLE DERIVES FROM THE FACT THAT THE PERSON RECEIVING THE BENEFIT OF PAYMENTS HAS A RIGHT, IN THE TERRITORY OF THE STATE IN WHICH THE DAMAGE OCCURRED, TO CLAIM COMPENSATION FROM THAT THIRD PARTY .
4 SINCE ARTICLE 52 IS THUS LIMITED TO THE SUBSTITUTION OF A FRESH CREDITOR FOR THE PREVIOUS ONE, THE INSTITUTION LIABLE CANNOT CLAIM FROM THE THIRD PARTY RESPONSIBLE ANY PAYMENT OTHER THAN THAT WHICH COULD BE CLAIMED BY THE VICTIM OF THE DAMAGE OR HIS DEPENDANTS .
5 SUCH A PAYMENT IS DEFINED BY THE RULES OF THE NATIONAL LAW GOVERNING THE RIGHT OF THE VICTIM TO COMPENSATION .
6 WHILST ARTICLE 52 REFERS TO THE NATIONAL LEGISLATION OF THE INSTITUTION LIABLE, TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT CAN INVOKE IN THE MEMBER STATE IN WHICH THE DAMAGE OCCURRED, THE BENEFIT OF SUBROGATION TO THE RIGHTS OF THE VICTIM OR HIS DEPENDANTS, OR THE EXERCISE OF THE DIRECT RIGHTS REFERRED TO UNDER LETTER ( B ), IT IN NO WAY MODIFIES THE SYSTEM OF EXTRA-CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY, WHICH REMAINS SUBJECT TO THE RULES OF NATIONAL LAW ALONE .
7 A NEGATIVE ANSWER MUST THEREFORE BE GIVEN TO THE QUESTION RAISED, IN THE SENSE THAT THE SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT OF THE DIRECT RIGHT REFERRED TO UNDER LETTER ( B ) OF ARTICLE 52 OF REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL IS DETERMINED BY THE RULE OF THE NATIONAL LAW DEFINING THE SOURCE AND LIMITS OF THE RIGHT OF COMPENSATION VESTED IN THE VICTIM OR HIS DEPENDANTS VIS-A-VIS THE THIRD PARTY RESPONSIBLE .
8 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, WHICH HAS SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT ARE NOT RECOVERABLE AND AS THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE, IN SO FAR AS THE PARTIES TO THE MAIN ACTION ARE CONCERNED, IN THE NATURE OF A STEP IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE A NATIONAL COURT, THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT .
THE COURT
IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO IT BY THE DISTRICT COURT OF BREDA BY ORDER OF THAT COURT DATED 28 NOVEMBER 1972 HEREBY RULES :
THE SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT OF THE DIRECT RIGHT REFERRED TO UNDER LETTER ( B ) OF ARTICLE 52 OF A REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES IS DETERMINED BY THE RULES OF THE NATIONAL LAW DEFINING THE SOURCE AND LIMITS OF THE RIGHT OF COMPENSATION VESTED IN THE VICTIM OR HIS DEPENDANTS VIS-A-VIS THE THIRD PARTY RESPONSIBLE .
