Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2023:541
Date: 2023-09-13
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF)
Procedure: Action for annulment - inadmissible
Origin: Netherlands

Action brought on 14 March 2022 – Netherlands v Commission (Case T-137/22) Language of the case: Dutch Parties Applicant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: and M. Bulterman and J. Langer, acting as Agents) Defendant: European Commission Form of order sought The applicant claims that the General Court should: annul the Commission decision bearing reference number Ares (2022) 99942 refusing the request of the Kingdom of the Netherlands for an extension by 4 years in addition to the 8-year period rule for the recovery of unduly paid amounts resulting from the FresQ case, and order the Commission to pay the costs. Pleas in law and main arguments In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law. First plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is based on an erroneous assumption that the recovery procedure in the FresQ case is not yet finalised. Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission makes an erroneous application of the third subparagraph of Article 54(2) of Regulation No 1306/2013 in so far as it assumes that the exceedance of the 8-year period for the recovery of the unduly paid amounts resulting from the FresQ case is attributable to the Netherlands. ____________