CELEX: 62015TN0157
Language: en
Date: 2015-03-30 00:00:00
Title: Case T-157/15: Action brought on 30 March 2015 — Estonia v Commission

8.6.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 190/25
            
         Action brought on 30 March 2015 — Estonia v Commission
   (Case T-157/15)
   (2015/C 190/29)
   Language of the case: Estonian
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Republic of Estonia (represented by: Kristi Kraavi-Käerdi, acting as Agent)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/103 of 16 January 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (C(2015) 53 final) (1) in so far as it concerns the Republic of Estonia in the amount of EUR 6 91  746,53;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The applicant contests the Commission Implementing Decision of 16 January 2015 (C(2015) 53 final) in so far as it concerns the Republic of Estonia in the amount of EUR 6 91  746,53 for the years 2009 to 2011.
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.
   By the first plea, the applicant submits that the contested decision should be annulled because the Commission wrongly ascertained and assessed the circumstances which were the basis of the decision and applied EU law incorrectly, leading to the false conclusion that Estonia had endangered EU funds.
   According to the second plea, the Commission infringed the principle of proportionality and incorrectly applied Article 52(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 (2), in that the contested decision imposed a flat-rate financial correction of 2 % on Estonia.
   According to the third plea, the Commission breached the principle of good administration, as it did not carefully assess and take into account all the evidence put forward by the applicant.
   According to the fourth plea, the Commission breached the principle of legal certainty, as it took the view that the GAEC landscape elements standard should also have been applied and its application continually monitored in 2009.
   
      (1)  OJ 2015 L 16, p. 33.
   
      (2)  Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 352/78, (EC) No 165/94, (EC) No 2799/98, (EC) No 814/2000, (EC) No 1290/2005 and (EC) No 485/2008 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 549).