# C_2021062EN.01001401.xml

| 22.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 62/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 62/14

---

Appeal brought on 24 November 2020 by the Kingdom of Spain against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 23 September 2020 in Case T-370/19 Spain v Commission

(Case C-632/20 P)

(2021/C 62/16)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: S. Centeno Huerta, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | allow the present appeal and set aside the judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 in Case T-370/19 brought against the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

allow the present appeal and set aside the judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 in Case T-370/19 brought against the European Commission;

| — | give judgment on the action for annulment by annulling Commission Decision of 18 March 2019 on the participation of the National Regulatory Authority of Kosovo in the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (1), and |
| --- | --- |

—

give judgment on the action for annulment by annulling Commission Decision of 18 March 2019 on the participation of the National Regulatory Authority of Kosovo in the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (1), and

| — | in any event order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

in any event order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Kingdom of Spain appeals from the General Court’s judgment of 23 September 2020 in Case T-370/19 Kingdom of Spain v European Commission on the following grounds:

| — | error of law in the interpretation of the concept of ‘third country’ within the meaning of Article 35 of Regulation 2018/1971 (2), in the light of the EU Treaties and of international law; |
| --- | --- |

—

error of law in the interpretation of the concept of ‘third country’ within the meaning of Article 35 of Regulation 2018/1971 (2), in the light of the EU Treaties and of international law;

| — | error of law in the interpretation and application of Article 111 of the Kosovo SAA, in conjunction with Article 35 of Regulation 2018/1971, by misinterpreting the consequences of the European Union not taking a position on Kosovo’s status in international law; |
| --- | --- |

—

error of law in the interpretation and application of Article 111 of the Kosovo SAA, in conjunction with Article 35 of Regulation 2018/1971, by misinterpreting the consequences of the European Union not taking a position on Kosovo’s status in international law;

| — | error of law in the interpretation of Article 35 of Regulation 2018/1971, in conjunction with Article 111 of the Kosovo SAA, in so far as the cooperation concerned does not include participation in BEREC and the Management Board of the BEREC Office; |
| --- | --- |

—

error of law in the interpretation of Article 35 of Regulation 2018/1971, in conjunction with Article 111 of the Kosovo SAA, in so far as the cooperation concerned does not include participation in BEREC and the Management Board of the BEREC Office;

| — | error of law in that it was held in the judgment under appeal that Article 17 TEU was a valid legal basis for adopting the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

error of law in that it was held in the judgment under appeal that Article 17 TEU was a valid legal basis for adopting the contested decision;

| — | error of law in the interpretation of Article 35(2) of Regulation 2018/1971 in that it was held in the judgment under appeal that working arrangements could be laid down unilaterally by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

—

error of law in the interpretation of Article 35(2) of Regulation 2018/1971 in that it was held in the judgment under appeal that working arrangements could be laid down unilaterally by the European Commission.

In the event that any of the abovementioned grounds are established the appeal should be allowed and consequently the action for annulment should be considered and upheld, thereby annulling Commission Decision of 18 March 2019 on the participation of the National Regulatory Authority of Kosovo in the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications.

---

(1)  OJ 2019 C 115, p. 26

(2)  Regulation (EU) 2018/1971 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the Agency for Support for BEREC (BEREC Office), amending Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1211/2009 (OJ 2018 L 321, p. 1).

---