Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 21 June 2012 —Spain v Commission(Cases T-264/10 and T-266/10)
Cohesion Fund and ERDF operational programme managed by Spain (ESF Combating discrimination 2007-2013 operational programme) — Interim payment application — Decision to suspend the payment deadline because of a significant deficiency in the operation of management and control systems — Actions for annulment — Admissibility — Article 87(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006
1.                     Actions for annulment — Actionable measures — Concept — Measures producing binding legal effects — Decision to interrupt the
period for settlement of an interim payment application — Measure constituting the final conclusion of a distinct special
procedure — Included (Art. 263 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1083/2006) (see paras 10-13, 20)
2.                     Economic, social and territorial cohesion — Structural assistance — EU financing — Regulation No 1083/2006 — Interim payment —
Application for payment fulfilling the conditions mentioned in Article 86 — Two-month period for making the interim payment
as from the registration of such an application — Interruption of payment after expiry of the period — Not included (Council
Regulation No 1083/2006, Arts 87(2), and 91(1)) (see paras 33-36)
Re:
ACTIONS brought against the Commission decisions of 10 May (T-264/10) and 11 May 2010 (T-266/10) informing the Spanish authorities
of the suspension of the deadline for the settlement of certain interim payment applications submitted by the Kingdom of Spain.
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Joins Cases T-264/10 and T-266/10 for the purposes of the judgment;
2.
Annuls the Commission decisions of 10 May and 11 May 2010 informing the Spanish authorities of the suspension of the deadline
for the settlement of certain interim payment applications submitted by the Kingdom of Spain;
3.
Rejects the application for acknowledgment that the application for payment of interest for late payment is well founded;
4.
Declares that that there is no need to adjudicate on the head of claim that the General Court order a measure of organisation
of procedure based on Article 64 of its Rules of Procedure;
5.
Orders the Commission to pay the costs.