Case T‑177/12
Spraylat GmbH
v
European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)
(REACH — Fee for registration of a substance — Reduction granted to micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises — Error in declaration relating to the size of the enterprise — Decision imposing an administrative charge — Proportionality)
Summary — General Court (Sixth Chamber), 2 October 2014
1.      Actions for annulment — Actionable measures — Concept — Invoice of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) establishing the exact amount of payments due — Included
(Art. 263 TFEU)
2.      Plea of illegality — Scope — Measures the illegality of which may be pleaded — General measure providing the basis of the contested decision — Need for a legal connection between the contested measure and the contested general act
(Arts 263 TFEU and 277 TFEU)
3.      Approximation of laws — Fees due to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) — Regulation No 340/2008 — Application for registration of a substance — False declaration — Imposition of an administrative fee by the Agency — Amount of that fee more than 17 times higher than the amount of the fee due for registration of the substance — Breach of principle of proportionality
(Commission Regulation No 340/2008, recital 11)
1.      See the text of the decision.
(see para. 21)
2.      See the text of the decision.
(see paras 24, 25)
3.      The principle of proportionality is one of the general principles of EU law and requires that measures implemented through EU law provisions be appropriate for attaining the legitimate objectives pursued by the legislation at issue and must not go beyond what is necessary to achieve them. Furthermore, where the institution which adopted the measure has a broad discretion, only if a measure is manifestly inappropriate having regard to the objective which the competent institution is required to pursue can its lawfulness be affected.
In that regard, in the context of an application to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) for registration of a certain chemical substance, recital 11 of Regulation No 340/2008 states that the submission of false information should be discouraged by the imposition of an administrative charge by the [ECHA] and a deterrent fine by the Member States, if appropriate. It is clear from that recital that the imposition of an administrative charge contributes to the objective of discouraging the transmission of false information by undertakings. However, it is also clear from that recital that the administrative charge cannot be treated as a fine.
An administrative charge more than 17 times greater than the amount of the fee which the undertaking had to pay for registration of the substance concerned and 28 times greater than the amount of the fee which could have been avoided by reason of the false declaration by that undertaking is manifestly disproportionate compared to the objective pursued by the legislation.
(see paras 33, 34, 36, 38)