Order — ECLI:EU:C:2007:582
Date: 2007-10-04
Language of the case: Finnish
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Financial provisions;Own resources
Concepts: General;Own resources of the Communities
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded;Appeal - inadmissible
Origin: Finland

Appeal brought on 16 November 2006 by the Republic of Finland against the order of 5 September 2006 in Case T-350/05 Republic of Finland v Commission of the European Communities (Case C-457/06 P) Language of the case: Finnish Parties Appellant: Republic of Finland (represented by E. Bygglin) Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities Form of order sought set aside the order of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 5 September 2006 in Case T-350/05 Republic of Finland v Commission of the European Communities and declare the action brought by Finland under Article 230 EC admissible and remit the main proceedings to the Court of First Instance, in which the Commission should be ordered to reimburse Finland also the costs incurred in the appeal proceedings Pleas in law and main arguments Finland submits that in its order the Court of First Instance infringed Community law within the meaning of Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice. Finland submits that the Court of First Instance erred in law by considering that the contested decision of the Commission did not constitute a decision against which an action may be brought within the meaning of Article 230 EC. In Finland's view, the contested decision of the Commission constitutes a decision against which an action may be brought within the meaning of Article 230. By its decision the Commission in fact denied Finland the opportunity to make a conditional payment within the meaning of the case-law of the Court of Justice. The contested decision thus has binding legal effects on Finland, as required in the case-law on the application of Article 230 EC, which affect Finland's interests and clearly change Finland's legal position. The contested decision also caused Finland a loss of rights and is thus clearly adverse to Finland. Finland submits that the Court of First Instance made several errors of law in assessing the case and as a result reached a decision contrary to Community law. ____________