# C_2004146EN.01000102.xml

| 29.5.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 146/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/1

---

Action brought on 31 March 2004 by the Republic of Finland against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-162/04)

(2004/C 146/02)

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 31 March 2004 by the Republic of Finland, represented by A. Guimaraes-Purokoski, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Republic of Finland claims principally that the Court should:

| i) | annul Commission Decision 2004/136/EC of 4 February 2004 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (1) in so far as it concerns Finland; |
| --- | --- |

i)

annul Commission Decision 2004/136/EC of 4 February 2004 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (1) in so far as it concerns Finland;

1

| ii) | order the Commission to pay the costs.
  The Republic of Finland claims in the alternative that the Court should: |
| --- | --- |

ii)

order the Commission to pay the costs.

The Republic of Finland claims in the alternative that the Court should:

| iii) | annul Commission Decision 2004/136/EC of 4 February 2004 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) as regards the sum of EUR 3 194 596; |
| --- | --- |

iii)

annul Commission Decision 2004/136/EC of 4 February 2004 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) as regards the sum of EUR 3 194 596;

| iv) | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

iv)

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Finland considers that when adopting the contested decision the Commission:

| i) | misapplied Article 9(2) of Regulation No 3887/92 (2) and wrongly assessed the factual situation in Pohjois-Karjala. The Commission failed to demonstrate that there were substantial defects in the Finnish system of control of area aid in Pohjois-Karjala and that the Finnish authorities had not taken the corrective measures required by the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

i)

misapplied Article 9(2) of Regulation No 3887/92 (2) and wrongly assessed the factual situation in Pohjois-Karjala. The Commission failed to demonstrate that there were substantial defects in the Finnish system of control of area aid in Pohjois-Karjala and that the Finnish authorities had not taken the corrective measures required by the Commission;

2

| ii) | wrongly assessed the factual situation in Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, Pohjois-Savo, Keski-Suomi, Kainuu and Lappi. The Commission failed to demonstrate that there were serious defects in the Finnish system of control of area aid in those regions and that the Finnish authorities had not taken the corrective measures required by the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

ii)

wrongly assessed the factual situation in Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, Pohjois-Savo, Keski-Suomi, Kainuu and Lappi. The Commission failed to demonstrate that there were serious defects in the Finnish system of control of area aid in those regions and that the Finnish authorities had not taken the corrective measures required by the Commission;

| iii) | breached the principle of proportionality by extending the contested decision to apply, in addition to Pohjois-Karjala, also to Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, Pohjois-Savo, Keski-Suomi, Kainuu and Lappi; and |
| --- | --- |

iii)

breached the principle of proportionality by extending the contested decision to apply, in addition to Pohjois-Karjala, also to Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, Pohjois-Savo, Keski-Suomi, Kainuu and Lappi; and

| iv) | failed to demonstrate that the methods of measurement used in the system of control of area aid in Pohjois-Karjala, Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, Pohjois-Savo, Keski-Suomi, Kainuu and Lappi were contrary to Community law. |
| --- | --- |

iv)

failed to demonstrate that the methods of measurement used in the system of control of area aid in Pohjois-Karjala, Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, Pohjois-Savo, Keski-Suomi, Kainuu and Lappi were contrary to Community law.

---

(1)  OJ L 40 of 12.2.2004, p. 31.

1

(2)  Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 of 23 December 1992 laying down detailed rules for applying the integrated administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes, OJ L 391 of 31.12.1992, p. 36.

2

---