Orders nº T-37/20 of Tribunal General de la Unión Europea, December 17, 2020

• Resolution Date: December 17, 2020
• Issuing Organization: Tribunal General de la Unión Europea
• Decision Number: T-37/20

(Action for annulment - EAGF and EAFRD - Time limit for bringing an action - Starting point - Notification and publication - No excusable error - Out of time - Inadmissibility)

In Case T-37/20,

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, represented by S. Brandon, acting as Agent, and by T. Buley, Barrister,

applicant,

v

European Commission, represented by J. Aquilina and A. Sauka, acting as Agents,

defendant,

APPLICATION under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1835 of 30 October 2019 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 2019 L 279, p. 98), in so far as it concerns certain expenditure incurred by the United Kingdom,

THE GENERAL COURT (Fourth Chamber),

composed of S. Gervasoni, President, P. Nihoul and J. Martín y Pérez de Nanclares (Rapporteur), Judges,

Registrar: E. Coulon,

makes the following

Order

Background to the dispute, procedure and forms of order sought

1 By Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1835 of 30 October 2019 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 2019 L 279, p. 98), the European Commission excluded from European Union financing, inter alia, certain expenditure incurred by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on the ground of ‘weakness in the definition of Active Farmer-connected companies’.

2 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 22 January 2020, the United Kingdom brought the present action for annulment of Implementing Decision 2019/1835 in so far as it excludes that expenditure from European Union financing (‘the contested decision’).

3 By separate document lodged at the Court Registry on 19 February 2020, the Commission raised a plea of inadmissibility under Article 130 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, contending that the action is out of time. The United Kingdom lodged its observations on that plea, after the time limit had been extended by the Court, on 26 August 2020.

4 By document lodged at the Court Registry on 15 April 2020, the United Kingdom requested that the present proceedings be stayed pending the adoption of several Commission decisions applying the provision relevant for the purposes of the resolution of the present dispute, namely Article 9(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing rules for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 637/2008 and Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 608). The Commission opposed that request for a stay of proceedings and the President of the Fourth Chamber of the General Court rejected it by decision of 2 June 2020.

5 By documents lodged at the Court Registry on 27 April and 14 May 2020, respectively, the Czech Republic and the French Republic applied for leave to intervene in the present proceedings in support of the form of order sought by the United Kingdom.

6 The United Kingdom claims that the Court should:

- reject the plea of inadmissibility raised by the Commission;

- annul the contested decision;

- order the Commission to pay the costs.

7 The Commission contends that the Court should:

- dismiss...