Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2016:708
Date: 2016-09-21
Language of the case: Spanish
Court formation: Tenth Chamber
Subject matter: Economic, social and territorial cohesion;Environment;Waste;Cohesion Fund
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded
Origin: Spain

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber), 21 September 2016 1. Appeal — Grounds — Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General Court — Inadmissibility — Challenge to the interpretation or application of EU law made by the General Court — Admissibility (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 168(1)(d) and 169(2)) 2. Economic, social and territorial cohesion — Structural assistance — European Union funding — Suspension or reduction of financial assistance following irregularities — Time limit for adoption of the decision by the Commission — Point from which time starts to run (Council Regulation No 1164/94, Annex II, Art. H(2), as amended by Regulations No 1264/1999 and No 1265/1999; Council Regulation No 1083/2006, Art. 100(5); Commission Regulation No 1386/2002, Art. 18(3)) 3. EU law — Interpretation — Texts in several languages — Differences between the various language versions — Account to be taken of the overall scheme and purpose of the legislation in question (Council Regulation No 1164/94, Annex II, Art. H(2), as amended by Regulations No 1264/1999 and No 1265/1999) 4. Economic, social and territorial cohesion — Structural assistance — European Union funding — Regulation No 1083/2006 — Financial corrections — Time limit for adoption of the decision by the Commission — Scope — Temporal scope (Council Regulation No 1083/2006, Arts 100(5), 105 and 108) 5. Economic, social and territorial cohesion — Structural assistance — European Union funding — Regulation No 1083/2006 — Financial corrections — Time limit for adoption of the decision by the Commission — Not possible to adopt after expiry of the time-limit (Council Regulation No 1083/2006, Art. 100(5)) 6. Actions for annulment — Grounds — Infringement of essential procedural requirements — Non-compliance with a time-limit imposed by the EU legislature — To be considered of the Court’s own motion (Art. 263 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1083/2006, Art. 100(5)) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 66, 67) 2. See the text of the decision. (see paras 70, 81, 99, 100, 116) 3. See the text of the decision. (see para. 80) 4. In the context of an action for annulment against a Commission decision adopted in 2011 concerning a reduction in financial aid granted between 2001 and 2003 under the Cohesion Fund, where the financial correction procedure did not begin until a date after the entry into force of Regulation No 1083/2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and the hearing of the parties was even held nearly three and a half years after the date of applicability of Article 100 of that regulation, the General Court did not err in law in applying Article 100(5) of Regulation No 1083/2006.It must be borne in mind that the Court of Justice has held on many occasions that it follows from Article 108 of Regulation No 1083/2006 that Article 100 thereof is applicable from 1 January 2007, including to programmes approved before that date but still in progress. In that context, it must be stated that the wording of the second paragraph of Article 108 of that regulation leaves no room for doubt as to its meaning and scope. Thus, in accordance with its first sentence, the provisions which are listed therein apply from 1 August 2006 ‘only for programmes for the period 2007 to 2013’. However, under its second sentence, ‘the other provisions shall apply from 1 January 2007’ without any other stipulation and, accordingly, in general. It follows from Article 108 of that regulation that Article 100 thereof, which requires the Commission to take a decision on the financial correction within six months of the date of the hearing, is applicable from 1 January 2007, including to programmes approved before that date but still in progress. In that regard, the wording of the second paragraph of Article 108 of that regulation leaves no room for doubt as to its meaning and scope. Thus, in accordance with its first sentence, the provisions which are listed therein apply from 1 August 2006 only for programmes for the period 2007 to 2013. However, under its second sentence, the other provisions shall apply from 1 January 2007 without any other stipulation and, accordingly, in general. Among the other provisions, within the meaning of the second sentence of the second paragraph of Article 108 of that regulation, is Article 100 of that regulation, which therefore applies as such from 1 January 2007. Such an application of that Article 100, entitled ‘Procedure’, is all the more justified since it complies with the principle that procedural rules are immediately applicable. Furthermore, Article 105(1) of Regulation No 1083/2006 is intended to lay down the transitional scheme for structural funds which were approved on the basis of EU rules in force until 31 December 2006 but which continue beyond that date and closure of which takes place at a later date. In so doing, the transitional scheme concerns the substantive rules applicable in that regard, as, moreover, is clear from the use of the terms ‘assistance’ and ‘project’ in that Article 105, in the same way as the content of paragraphs 2 and 3 thereof, and not rules of a procedural nature, which must be governed by the rule of principle. Consequently, that transitional provision set out in Article 105 of Regulation No 1083/2006 does not apply to the procedural time limit with which the Commission is required to comply when it adopts a decision on financial corrections under that regulation. (see paras 89-96, 98) 5. See the text of the decision. (see para. 113) 6. See the text of the decision. (see para. 114)