Case T-31/25: Action brought on 21 January 2025 – Greece v Commission
Date: 2025-01-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, competence of the institution, eligibility criteria, principle of proportionality, reimbursement of aid








C_202501888EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/1888


7.4.2025






Action brought on 21 January 2025 – Greece v Commission


(Case T-31/25)

(C/2025/1888)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: E. Leftheriotou, A. Vasilopoulou and M. Tassopoulou)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision (1) in so far as it imposes on the Hellenic Republic financial corrections in an amount of EUR 66 670 175,97 gross and an amount of EUR 66 663 524,1 net, following investigation XC/2020/001/GR on the implementation of cross-compliance for the claim years 2018-2020;










—


in the alternative, annul the contested decision and limit the rate of correction imposed by it to 5 %, upholding the fourth plea in law;










—


in any event, limit the amount of the net financial correction imposed to EUR 140 004,13, as indicated in the fifth plea in law; and










—


order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by the Hellenic Republic.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the contested decision was adopted in breach of the clearance of accounts procedure and the general principles of transparency and good cooperation, and that there was no legitimate conclusion by the Commission that would require a correction for cross-compliance.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging, in its first part, the lack of competence of the Commission service that imposed the corrections and, in its second part, breach of the principle of proportionality, since corrections are imposed on the basis of findings that do not give rise to any penalties for the beneficiaries of aid.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging an incorrect interpretation and application of the provisions of EU law and errors of fact committed by the Commission in drawing up its further findings, as well as a lack of reasoning.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Commission made a correction on the basis of an incorrect interpretation and application of Article 12(6) and (7) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 907/2014 (OJ L 255, 28.8.2014).










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the law in the calculation of the contested net financial correction and failure to apply deductions, due to the prior imposition of financial corrections on the same expenditure that was subject to the contested financial correction, in breach of the Commission’s guidelines.






(1)  Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/2879 of 13 November 2024, notified under document C(2024) 7849 (OJ L, 15.11.2024), ‘excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by certain Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)’.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1888/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)