Case T-13/17: Action brought on 12 January 2017 — Europa Terra Nostra v Parliament
Date: 2017-01-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU financing, financial aid, financial legislation, foundation, freedom of association, freedom of expression, guarantee, political parties, rule of law








C_2017063EN.01004002.xml










27.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/40





Action brought on 12 January 2017 — Europa Terra Nostra v Parliament
(Case T-13/17)
(2017/C 063/53)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Europa Terra Nostra e.V. (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: P. Richter, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Article I.4.1 of the defendant’s decision of 12 December 2016 (Reference: FINS-2017-30) concerning the reduction of the pre-financing amount to 33 % of the specified maximum amount and ordering the lodging of a guarantee;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant raises two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law: infringement of the Treaties and of the rules of law relating to their application






—


The applicant claims, that under Article 134(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (1) and Article 206(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012, (2) guarantees are not at all required for low-value grants.










—


Moreover, the defendant has no interest in obtaining a guarantee because the review request brought against the ‘Alliance for Peace and Freedom’ (APF) is entirely devoid of substance and manifestly unfounded.










—


In addition, the defendant deliberately delayed the review procedure brought against the APF for half a year and thereby itself occasioned its alleged need for a guarantee.










—


Furthermore, the measures are disproportionate because the applicant is not in a position to provide guarantees and is threatened with the loss of its economic existence through the withdrawal of the financial assistance, which gives rise to a distortion of political competition. This constitutes a serious infringement of the applicant’s fundamental rights to freedom of expression and association (Articles 11 and 12 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union).














2.


Second plea in law: misuse of powers
In addition, the applicant alleges a misuse of powers by the defendant. It takes the view that the defendant’s measures amount to a purely politically motivated manoeuvre designed to withdraw financial assistance from an unpopular political party, including the foundation affiliated to it, and thereby to manipulate political competition within the European Union.






(1)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ 2012 L 298, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 of 29 October 2012 on the rules of application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ 2012 L 362, p. 1).