Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2017:3
Date: 2017-01-11
Language of the case: Spanish
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Fisheries policy
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Spain

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 11 January 2017 1. Fisheries — Conservation of the resources of the sea — System of fishing quotas — Allocation of fishing opportunities among the Member States — Council’s margin of discretion — Judicial review — Limits — Adoption total allowable catch for fish species in the absence of conclusive scientific information as to the need for the measure — Lawfulness (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1380/2013, Art. 6(2); Council Regulation No 1367/2014, Annex) 2. Fisheries — Conservation of the resources of the sea — System of fishing quotas — Aim (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1380/2013, Recitals 35 and 36 and Art. 16) 3. EU law — Principles — Proportionality — Scope — Discretion of the EU legislature in the area of common agricultural policy — Judicial review — Limits (Arts 40 TFEU and 43 TFEU) 4. EU law — Principles — Non-discrimination — Application in the area of common agricultural policy (Art. 38(1), second para., TFEU and 40(2), second para., TFEU) 1. When it is fixing total allowable catches [TACs] and allocating fishing opportunities among the Member States, the Council has to evaluate a complex economic situation, for which it has broad discretion. In such circumstances, the Council’s discretion is not limited to the nature and scope of the measures to be taken but extends, to some degree, to the finding of the basic facts. In reviewing the exercise of such a power, the Court must confine itself to examining whether there has been a manifest error or misuse of power or whether the authority in question has clearly exceeded the bounds of its discretion. In that regard, although Article 6(2) of the same regulation establishes an obligation to ‘take account’ of available scientific, technical and economic advice when adopting conservation measures, it does not prevent the EU legislature from adopting such conservation measures where there is no conclusive scientific, technical and economic advice. Fishery conservation measures need not be completely consistent with the scientific advice and the absence of such advice or the fact that it is inconclusive cannot prevent the Council from adopting such measures as it deems necessary for achieving the objectives of the common fisheries policy [CFP]. It follows that the Council had the power, under Regulation No 1367/2014 fixing for 2015 and 2016 the fishing opportunities for Union fishing vessels for certain deep-sea fish stocks, to adopt a common TAC for roundnose grenadier and roughhead grenadier even in the absence of ‘conclusive’ scientific evidence that those two species occur and are caught in the management zones in question, as it considered that that measure was appropriate for the conservation of roundnose grenadier resources. (see paras 46, 49-51) 2. The aim of the national quotas scheme consists in ensuring that each Member State has an equitable share of the established TAC, determined essentially on the basis of catches from which traditional fishing activities, the local populations that are especially dependent on fisheries and related industries of that Member State benefited before the quota scheme was established. (see para. 57) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 71, 72) 4. See the text of the decision. (see para. 80)