CELEX: 62015CN0389
Language: en
Date: 2015-07-17 00:00:00
Title: Case C-389/15: Action brought on 17 July 2015 — European Commission v Council of the European Union

21.9.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 311/42
            
         Action brought on 17 July 2015 — European Commission v Council of the European Union
   (Case C-389/15)
   (2015/C 311/45)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, J. Guillem Carrau, B. Hartmann, Agents)
   
      Defendant: Council of the European Union
   
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the Council of 7 May 2015 authorising the opening of negotiations on a revised Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications as regards matters falling within the competence of the European Union;
            
         
               —
            
            
               maintain the effects of the contested decision, where appropriate, until the entry into force, within a reasonable period from the delivery of the present judgment, of a new decision that is to be adopted by the Council of the European Union pursuant to Article 218(3), (4) and (8) TFEU;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Council of the European Union to bear the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      First plea: The contested Decision acknowledges the existence of competence of the Member States, in breach of Article 3 TFEU, since the negotiation concerns an agreement which falls within the exclusive competence of the Union
   
      Second plea: Infringement of Articles 207(3) and 218(3), (4) and (8) TFEU because the Council has appointed Member States as ‘negotiators’, in a matter of EU competence, and has not adopted the contested Decision in accordance with the applicable majority