Case T-459/16: Action brought on 19 August 2016 — Spain v Commission
Date: 2016-08-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, eligibility criteria, grassland, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, single payment scheme, wooded area








C_2016392EN.01004202.xml










24.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/42





Action brought on 19 August 2016 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-459/16)
(2016/C 392/56)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. Sampol Pucurull, lawyer for the Spanish State)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1059 of 21 June, excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF), the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), as regards the Kingdom of Spain, in respect of certain area payments and excluding EUR 262 887 429,57;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one plea in law, divided into two parts.






1.


The applicant claims that the flat rate correction imposed by the Commission infringes Article 31 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ 2005 L 209, p. 1), as well as the 1997 guidelines (Document VI/5330/97), regarding the conditions that must be satisfied in order to impose a correction of 25 % or of 10 %. That infringement results in the Commission exceeding the limits of its discretion and breach of the principles of proportionality and legal certainty.






—


First, the Spanish authorities are of the opinion that the various flat rate corrections infringe Article 31(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005, in relation to the implementation of the 1997 guidelines and the principle of proportionality, as the Commission lacks serious and reasonable grounds to conclude that it had to impose a financial correction of 25 %, in relation to the wooded pastures in the years 2009 to 2013, except for wooded pastures for five Autonomous Communities in 2009, with regard to which it is considered that Article 73a(2)(a) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 of 21 April 2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers (OJ 2004 L 141, p. 18) is applicable.




The Spanish authorities also dispute the application by the Commission of a flat rate correction of 10 % for the years 2009 to 2013 for the shrub pastures and for the wooded grazing pasture in 2009.






—


Secondly, the authorities are of the opinion that the contested Decision infringes Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 in relation to the principles of proportionality and legal certainty, in so far as it does not take into account Article 73a(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004, in relation to Article 137 of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003.