Action brought on 24 July 2014 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-548/14)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, Abogado del Estado)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul in part the Decision of 15 May 2014 finding that the remission of import duties is justified for a certain amount and that the remission of import duties is not justified for another amount in a particular case (REM 03/2013), and

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of the fifth subparagraph of Article 220(2)(b) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1).

The applicant submits in that regard that the notice to importers published on 21 May 2010 refers exclusively to the imports of tuna preparations from Colombia and El Salvador, without referring to Ecuador, and includes merely a general reference to the effect that irregularities in respect of cumulation of origin cannot be ruled out in other countries. The notice published meets the requirements of any notice in respect of Colombia and El Salvador, but cannot be extended arbitrarily to other countries solely because it includes a general reference to the mere possibility of irregularities.

Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 239 of the Community Customs Code.

The applicant submits in that regard that in the present case the process for obtaining certificates of origin is carried out in accordance with the rules laid down to that effect by the competent authorities, which apply the legislation incorrectly and fail to fulfil their obligations with regard to issuing certificates and monitoring the orderly functioning of the arrangements. It is also continuing conduct which helps to create legitimate expectations on the part of operators. The requirements are therefore satisfied in order to acknowledge that there is a special situation within the framework of the preferential arrangements.

Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the fifth subparagraph of Article 220(2)(b) of the Community Customs Code in relation to the rule on regional cumulation in the implementing regulation.

The applicant states in that regard that since belonging to the same regional group is directly connected with the rule on regional cumulation and the notice includes the cumulation in its general reference to the possibility of irregularities, the right to rely on good faith cannot be affected as regards operations in which the rule on cumulation has not been applied to the countries referred to in the notice. In that case, the limitation cannot be applied to those imports which do not use products originating in Colombia and El Salvador.