Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2010:150
Date: 2010-03-18
Language of the case: Greek
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Wine
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded;Appeal - inadmissible
Origin: Greece

Summary 78. As none of the grounds of appeal put forward by the Hellenic Republic can be upheld, the appeal should be dismissed in its entirety. VI – Costs 79. Pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 122 of the Rules of Procedure, the Court of Justice is to make a decision as to costs where an appeal is unfounded. It follows from the first subparagraph of Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, in conjunction with Article 118 thereof, that the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party’s pleadings. 80. As the Commission has made such an application and the appellant has been unsuccessful, the appellant should be ordered to pay the costs. VII – Conclusion 81. I accordingly propose that the Court should rule as follows: 1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. The Hellenic Republic shall pay the costs of the proceedings. 1 – Original language: German. 2 – Judgment in Case T-339/06 Greece v Commission [2008] ECR II-3525. 3 – Commission Decision 2006/669/EC of 4 October 2006 fixing, for the 2006 financial year and in respect of a certain number of hectares, the definitive financial allocations to Member States for the restructuring and conversion of vineyards under Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 (OJ 1999 L 275, p. 62) (‘the contested decision’). 4 – Judgments in Case C-321/99 P ARAP and Others v Commission [2002] ECR I‑4287, paragraph 48; Case C-353/01 P Mattila v Council and Commission [2004] ECR I‑1073, paragraph 27; and Case C-496/99 P Commission v CASSucchi di Frutta [2004] ECR I‑3801, paragraph 50. 5 – Order in Case C-174/97 P FFSA and Others v Commission [1998] ECR I-1303, paragraph 24. 6 – Judgment in Case C-210/98 P Salzgitter v Commission [2000] ECR I‑5843, paragraph 43. 7 – In this context, the General Court referred to the judgments in Case 32/72 Wasaknäcke [1972] ECR 1181, paragraph 2, and in Case 52/72 Walzenmühle Magstadt [1972] ECR 1267, paragraph 2. 8 – Order in Case C-2/88 Imm. Zwartveld and Others [1990] ECR I-3365, paragraph 17; judgments in Case C-275/00 First and Franex [2002] ECR I‑10943, paragraph 49, and Case C-339/00 Ireland v Commission [2003] ECR I‑11757, paragraph 71. 9 – Commission Decision 2005/716/EC of 10 October 2005 fixing, for the 2005/06 marketing year and in respect of a certain number of hectares, an indicative financial allocation by Member State for the restructuring and conversion of vineyards under Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 (OJ 2005 L 271, p. 45). 10 – See, inter alia, Case C-313/04 Egenberger [2006] ECR I-6331, paragraph 33, with further references. 11 – For this aspect see the judgment in Joined Cases C-403/04 P and C-405/04 P Sumitomo Metal Industries and Nippon Steel v Commission [2007] ECR I‑729, paragraph 77 and the case-law cited therein.