Notices for publication in the OJ nº T-755/18 of Tribunal General de la Unión Europea, February 22, 2019

• Resolution Date: February 22, 2019
• Issuing Organization: Tribunal General de la Unión Europea
• Decision Number: T-755/18

Action brought on 22 December 2018 - FL Brüterei M-V and Others v Commission

(Case T-755/18)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: FL Brüterei M-V GmbH (Finkenthal, Germany), Erdegut GmbH (Finkenthal), Ökofarm Grofl Markow GmbH (Lelkendorf, Germany) (represented by: H. Schmidt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

annul Article 1(4) of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1584 ¹ of 22 October 2018, published under L 264/1 in the Official Journal of the European Union on 23 October 2018, which amended Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 ² as follows: ‘in Article 42(b), the date “31 December 2018” is replaced by “31 December 2020”’;

order the defendant to pay EUR 2 469 503.44 to FL Brüterei M-V GmbH plus default interest from the date of notification of the action at the rate of eight percentage points per annum above the base rate of the European Central Bank; and

rule that the defendant is under an obligation to compensate the applicants for the additional harm caused to them by the Commission’s adoption of a further two-year exception with Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1584, which, when organic pullets ‘are not available’, permits non-organic pullets to be brought into organic pullet livestock, without, having regard to the Commission’s duty to keep that exception ‘to a minimum’ under Article 22(2) of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, ³ the use of the exception requiring that no hatcheries within a radius of up to 700 kilometres from the location of the pullet farm supply organic pullets, and that proof of the lack of availability of organic pullets is to be provided through the unsuccessful placement of orders with three hatcheries that are known suppliers of organic pullets and not through demand at hatcheries that are known for not supplying organic pullets.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The action is based on the following pleas in law.

First plea in law: invalidity of the regulatory act

In the context of the first plea in law, the applicants claim that the defendant failed to fulfil its duty to keep exceptions to the principle laid down by Article 14(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, according to which young animals for organic livestock production must be born and raised on organic holdings, to a minimum.

In that regard, it is submitted that the extension of the exception by two years infringes the requirement in Article 22 of Regulation...