CELEX: 62015TA0141
Language: en
Date: 2016-10-20 00:00:00
Title: Case T-141/15: Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2016 — Czech Republic v Commission (EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Protection of vineyards — Expenditure incurred by the Czech Republic — Legal certainty — Legitimate expectations)

5.12.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 454/23
            
         
      Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2016 — Czech Republic v Commission
      (Case T-141/15) (1)
      
      ((EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Protection of vineyards - Expenditure incurred by the Czech Republic - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations))
      (2016/C 454/42)
      Language of the case: Czech
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Očková, J. Vláčil and L. Březinová, acting as Agents)
      
         Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Eggers and P. Ondrůšek, acting as Agents)
      
         Re:
      
      Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of 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) (OJ 2015, L 16, p. 33), in so far as it excludes the expenditure envisaged by the Czech Republic under EAGF for a degree of protection of vineyards for the years 2010 to 2012, coming to a total of EUR 2 123 199,04.
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      The Court:
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Dismisses the action;
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 213, 29.6.2015.