3
Due to the fact that the division of competences between the EEC and its
Member States is by the very nature of the Community subject to change,
it might prove misleading to give a precise statement of the extent of
Community competence, as it could be overtaken by Internal changer in the
EEC. A precios reply ad to the question tothe the 280 vi
Լ
States are competent in relation to particular treaty provision can
therefore not be given and to ask for one would indeed amount to an
interference in the internal matters of the EEC. As a general
proposition, EEC competence flows from the Directive adopted by the EC Council of Ministers. (3)
The question as to whom a contracting party to the future treaty should
address itself in the case of matters concerning the treaty is however
perfectly legitimate. It follows from the nature of the EEC that a
contracting party to the future treaty will always find a "respondent"
whether it addresses itself to a Member State or to the EEC or to both.
Rather than being a complex matter which would render the dealings of contracting parties to the future treaty more difficult, the
participation of both the EEC and its Member States will enhance the
security of other contracting parties. All of the obligations which may
flow from the future treaty will be discharged, either by the EEC or by
its Member States as the case may be.
(3) Council Directive 87/54/EEC of 16 December 1986 on the legal
protection of topographies of semiconductor products,
0.J. L24, 27 January 1987, p. 36.