Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2004:704
Date: 2004-11-11
Language of the case: Portuguese
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF)
Concepts: General;Commission;Conditions subject to which expenditure is borne by the EAGGF
Procedure: Action for annulment - successful
Origin: Portugal

Summary of the Judgment 1. Action for annulment – Actionable measures – Meaning – Measures producing binding legal effects – Decision contained in a letter from the Director-General for Agriculture of the Commission informing a Member State of a reduction in the financial advances extended under the EAGGF – Included (Art. 230 EC; Commission Regulation No 750/1999, Art. 39(3)) 2. Agriculture – Common agricultural policy – Financing by the EAGGF – Flat-rate reduction to financial advances extended – Decision contained in a letter from the Director-General for Agriculture of the Commission – No delegation by the Commission – Decision vitiated by lack of powers (Rules of Procedure of the Commission, Arts 13 and 14; Commission Regulation No 1750/1999, Art. 39(3)) 1. In order to ascertain whether measures are acts within the meaning of Article 230 EC, it is necessary to look to their substance, as the form in which they are cast is, in principle, immaterial in this respect. Only a measure the legal effects of which are binding on, and are capable of affecting the interests of, the applicant by bringing about a distinct change in his legal position is an act or decision which may be the subject of an action for annulment under that article. That applies to the decision contained in the letter of the Director-General for Agriculture of the Commission informing a Member State of a reduction in advances extended, in accordance with Article 39(3) of Regulation No 1750/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Regulation No 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), as most recently amended by Regulation No 1763/2001, since that decision constitutes the only measure which clearly determines the content and scope of the disputed financial correction, while the decisions regarding the advances to be paid to the Member States refer only to the overall amount of monthly advances to be paid to them and do not contain any reference to the amount of the financial corrections to be made with respect to the parties to whom they are addressed. (see paras 35, 41-42) 2. The decision contained in the letter of the Director-General for Agriculture of the Commission informing a Member State of a reduction in advances extended, in accordance with Article 39(3) of Regulation No 1750/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Regulation No 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), as most recently amended by Regulation No 1763/2001, is vitiated by a lack of powers, since its signatory did not himself have the power to adopt that decision and the Commission did not invoke any act of delegation or sub-delegation taken on the basis of Article 13 or Article 14 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure which might have applied to that Director. (see paras 44, 47)