# C_2011089EN.01002701.xml

| 19.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/27

---

Action brought on 2 February 2011 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-76/11)

2011/C 89/52

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: N. Díaz Abad, acting as Agent)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant requests the Court to:

| — | annul Commission Regulation (EU) No 1004/2010 of 8 November 2010 of operating deductions from certain fishing quotas for 2010 on account of overfishing in the previous year (OJ 2010 L 291, p. 31); and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Regulation (EU) No 1004/2010 of 8 November 2010 of operating deductions from certain fishing quotas for 2010 on account of overfishing in the previous year (OJ 2010 L 291, p. 31); and

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant raises four pleas in law in support of its action:

| 1. | First plea in law, based on an error of legal basis, given that the legal basis for the impugned act is Article 105 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 (1), which entered into force on 1 January 2010, whilst the infringements to which the penalties at issue apply were committed in 2009. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, based on an error of legal basis, given that the legal basis for the impugned act is Article 105 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 (1), which entered into force on 1 January 2010, whilst the infringements to which the penalties at issue apply were committed in 2009.

1

| 2. | Second plea in law, based on breach of the principles of legality and legal certainty, since penalty rules are being applied which were not in force at the time the infringements occurred. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, based on breach of the principles of legality and legal certainty, since penalty rules are being applied which were not in force at the time the infringements occurred.

| 3. | Third plea in law, based on breach of the principle of non-retroactivity of less favourable penalty provisions, insofar as less favourable rules are being applied to infringements that occurred in 2009. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, based on breach of the principle of non-retroactivity of less favourable penalty provisions, insofar as less favourable rules are being applied to infringements that occurred in 2009.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, based on the fact that it may not be left to the Commission to determine the law applicable by reference to the time it chooses to commence an inquiry into a practice. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, based on the fact that it may not be left to the Commission to determine the law applicable by reference to the time it chooses to commence an inquiry into a practice.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, amending Regulations (EC) No 847/96, (EC) No 2371/2002, (EC) No 811/2004, (EC) No 768/2005, (EC) No 2115/2005, (EC) No 2166/2005, (EC) No 388/2006, (EC) No 509/2007, (EC) No 676/2007, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) No 1300/2008, (EC) No 1342/2008 and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1627/94 and (EC) No 1966/2006 (OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1).

1

---