# C_2011095EN.01000602.xml

| 26.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/6

---

Appeal brought on 17 January 2011 by the Kingdom of Spain against the judgment delivered on 12 November 2010 in Case T-113/08 Kingdom of Spain v European Commission

(Case C-24/11P)

2011/C 95/10

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Appellant(s): Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. Muñoz Pérez, agent)

Appellant(s):

Other party/parties to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party/parties to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Grant the appeal and set aside the judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2010 in Case T-113/08 Kingdom of Spain v European Commission |
| --- | --- |

—

Grant the appeal and set aside the judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2010 in Case T-113/08 Kingdom of Spain v European Commission

Kingdom of Spain

European Commission

| — | Annulment of all the financial corrections relating to aid for the production of olive oil granted in Commission Decision 2008/68/EC (1) of 20 December 2007; in the alternative, annulment of the financial corrections in the olive oil production sector which relate to expenditure for which advances were paid before 24 November 2002; in the further alternative, annulment of the financial corrections in the olive oil production sector which relate to expenditure for which advances were paid before 15 July 2000. |
| --- | --- |

—

Annulment of all the financial corrections relating to aid for the production of olive oil granted in Commission Decision 2008/68/EC (1) of 20 December 2007; in the alternative, annulment of the financial corrections in the olive oil production sector which relate to expenditure for which advances were paid before 24 November 2002; in the further alternative, annulment of the financial corrections in the olive oil production sector which relate to expenditure for which advances were paid before 15 July 2000.

1

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

| 1. | Internal inconsistency in the reasoning of the General Court and breach of Article 8 of Regulation 1663/95 (2) in accepting that the Commission should base its financial correction on irregularities not specified in letter AGR 16844 by which the results of investigation HO/2002/91/ES were communicated. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Internal inconsistency in the reasoning of the General Court and breach of Article 8 of Regulation 1663/95 (2) in accepting that the Commission should base its financial correction on irregularities not specified in letter AGR 16844 by which the results of investigation HO/2002/91/ES were communicated.

2

| 2. | Breach of Articles 36 and 53 of the Statute of the Court of Justice arising from failure to state sufficient reasons in the judgment by making no mention at all of, and as a result not ruling on, an essential head of claim formulated by the Kingdom of Spain in the record of the hearing concerning the determination of the dies ad quem for the time-limit of 24 months provided for in Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation No 729/70 (3) and Article 7 of Regulation No 1258/1999. (4) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Breach of Articles 36 and 53 of the Statute of the Court of Justice arising from failure to state sufficient reasons in the judgment by making no mention at all of, and as a result not ruling on, an essential head of claim formulated by the Kingdom of Spain in the record of the hearing concerning the determination of the dies ad quem for the time-limit of 24 months provided for in Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation No 729/70 (3) and Article 7 of Regulation No 1258/1999. (4)

dies ad quem

3

4

| 3. | Infringement of the time-limit of 24 months established in Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation No 729/70 and Article 7 of Regulation No 1258/1999:






  — | First, by calculating that time-limit from the date of the AGR 16844 letter, although that did not specify all the grounds on which the financial correction was based. |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

Infringement of the time-limit of 24 months established in Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation No 729/70 and Article 7 of Regulation No 1258/1999:

—

First, by calculating that time-limit from the date of the AGR 16844 letter, although that did not specify all the grounds on which the financial correction was based.

| — | Secondly, by relying on a judgment of the Court of Justice (5) which is not applicable to a sector such as the olive oil production sector, in order to hold that the decisive date for the calculation of the time-limit of 24 months is the date of payment of the balance rather than payment of the advance. |
| --- | --- |

—

Secondly, by relying on a judgment of the Court of Justice (5) which is not applicable to a sector such as the olive oil production sector, in order to hold that the decisive date for the calculation of the time-limit of 24 months is the date of payment of the balance rather than payment of the advance.

5

---

(1)  excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 2008 L 18, p. 12)

1

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1663/95 of 7 July 1995 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 regarding the procedure for the clearance of the accounts of the EAGGF Guarantee Section

2

(3)  Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 of the Council of 21 April 1970 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (English special edition: Series I Chapter 1970(I) p. 218)

3

(4)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ 1999 L 160, p. 103)

4

(5)  In Case C-329/00 Spain v Commission [2003] ECR I-6103

5

Spain

Commission

---