Reports of Cases

2002 I-06677

Subject-matter

Appeal against the judgment delivered on 23 November 1999 by the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-173/98 Unión de Pequeños Agricultores v Council of the European Union ─ annulment in part of Council Regulation (EC) No 1638/98 of 20 July 1998 amending Regulation No 136/66/EEC on the establishment of a common organisation of the market in oils and fats dismissed as manifestly inadmissible

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• EEC Treaty (Rome) - Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice, Article 49 : paragraph 1
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 5 : paragraph 42
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 173 : paragraphs 35, 40
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 173 -L2 : paragraph 34
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 173 -L3 : paragraph 34
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 173 -L4 : paragraphs 4, 7, 13, 19, 20, 33, 40
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 177 : paragraph 40
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 184 : paragraph 40
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 189 : paragraph 7
• EU Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 48 : paragraph 45
• General Court - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A114P1 : paragraph 5
• Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A69P2 : paragraph 48
• Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A69P4L1 : paragraph 49
• Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A118 : paragraphs 48, 49
• Regulation 136/66 : paragraph 2
• Regulation 1638/98 : paragraph 1
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -25/62 : paragraph 36
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -92/78 : paragraph 35
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -294/83 : paragraph 40
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -222/84 : paragraph 39
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -67/85 : paragraph 44
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -314/85 : paragraph 40
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -309/89 : paragraphs 36, 44
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -358/89 : paragraphs 36, 44
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -87/95 : paragraph 37
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -452/98 : paragraph 36
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -41/99 : paragraph 36
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -174/99 : paragraph 21
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -424/99 : paragraph 39

Operative part

• Confirms : General Court - Order T -173/98

Opinion

• EEC Treaty (Rome) - Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice, Article 20 : point 47
  
• EEC Treaty (Rome) - Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice, Article 37 : point 47
  
• ECSC Treaty (Paris), Article 33 : point 76
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 173 : points 67, 68, 70, 71
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 173 -P1 : points 68, 69
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 173 -P2 : points 76, 77
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 189 : point 68
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 10 : point 29
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 220 : point 93
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 225 : points 49, 93, 94
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 230 : points 29, 45, 48, 61, 66, 75, 79, 84, 94, 102
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 230 -L4 : points 1 - 3, 23, 25, 28, 33, 35 - 37, 49, 59, 65, 71 - 73, 75, 76, 78, 79, 84, 93, 98, 99, 103
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 230 -L5 : points 48, 65, 102
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 232 : point 94
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 234 : points 37, 42, 44, 45, 48, 65, 99, 102
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 234 -L3 : point 42
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 235 : points 72, 94
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 236 : point 94
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 238 : point 94
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 241 : point 72
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 242 : point 46
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 243 : point 46
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 288 : point 72
  
• General Court - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A111 : point 80
  
• Regulation 136/66 : point 6
  
• Regulation 1638/98 : points 1, 7
  
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2000) : point 39
  
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2000) -A47 : point 39
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/54 : point 76
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -8/55 : point 76
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -16/62 : point 76
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -25/62 : point 2
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -22/70 : point 68
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -246/81 : point 2
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -294/83 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -222/84 : points 39, 97
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -314/85 : point 41
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -222/86 : point 97
  
• Court of Justice - Order C -2/88 : point 68
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -62/88 : point 70
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -70/88 : point 69
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -143/88 : points 44, 98
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -331/88 : point 66
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -213/89 : point 97
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -309/89 : point 83
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -358/89 : point 2
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -358/89 : point 83
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -87/90 : point 97
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -97/91 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -97/91 : point 97
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -188/92 : points 2, 48, 65
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -465/93 : point 44
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -209/94 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -57/95 : point 68
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -142/95 : point 2
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -178/95 : points 48, 65
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -321/95 : point 33
  
• General Court - Judgment T -16/96 : point 25
  
• General Court - Order T -178/98 : point 1
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -451/98 : points 2, 83
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -1/99 : point 97
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -226/99 : point 97
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -239/99 : points 48, 65
  
• Court of Justice - Order C -301/99 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Order C -300/00 : point 34
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

• 16/02/2000

Date of the Opinion

• 21/03/2002

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

25/07/2002

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 176 from 24.06.2000, p.3

Judgment: OJ C 233 from 28.09.2002, p.4

Name of the parties

Unión de Pequeños Agricultores v Council

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Schohe, Gerrit: Rechtsschutz des Einzelnen gegenüber abgeleitetem Gemeinschaftsrecht: eine schwarze Serie, Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht - EWS 2002 p.424-426 (DE)
2. Claes, M.L.H.K.: Jurisprudentie bestuursrecht 2002 nº 237 (NL)
3. Malvasio, Florence: L'actualité juridique ; droit administratif 2002 p.868-877 (FR)
4. Götz, Volkmar: Individuelle Betroffenheit als Klagevoraussetzung gegen EG-VO, Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt 2002 p.1350-1351 (DE)
5. Cassia, Paul: Quelles perspectives pour la recevabilité du recours en annulation des particuliers?, Recueil Le Dalloz 2002 Jur. p.2825-2830 (FR)
6. Streinz, Rudolf: (Keine) Ausweitung der Klagebefugnis von Individuen - EuGH vs. EuG?, Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht - EWS 2002 Heft 10 p.I (DE)
7. De Lange, F.A.: Administratiefrechtelijke beslissingen ; Rechtspraak bestuursrecht 2002 nº 371 (NL)
8. Ludewig, Philipp G.: A lost opportunity: No new approach to the concept of locus standi under Articel 230 EC, European Law Reporter 2002 p.259-260 (EN)
9. Sorto, Anna ; Helander, Petri: Euroopan yhteisöjen ensimmäisen oikeusasteen tuomioistuimen tuomio 3.5.2002 asiassa T-177/01, Jégo-Quéré et Cie SA ja Euroopan yhteisöjen tuomioistuimen tuomio 25.7.2002 asiassa C-50/00 P, Unión de Pequeños Agricultores, Lakimies 2002 p.1008-1017 (FI)
10. Berrod, Frédérique ; Mariatte, Flavien: Le pourvoi dans l'affaire Unión de Pequeños Agricultores c/ Conseil: le retour de la procession d'Echternach, Europe 2002 Octobre Chron. nº 12 p.7-11 (FR)
11. Kronenberger, Vincent ; Dejmek, Paulina: Locus standi of individuals before Community courts under Article 230(4)EC: Illusions and Desillusions after the Jégo-Quéré (T-177/01) and Unión de Pequeños Agricultores (C-50/00 P) judgments, The European legal forum 2002, n° 5, p. 257-264 (EN)
12. Van der Wal, G.: Arrest Uniòn de Pequeños Agricultores: de ontvankelijkheid van particulieren weer beperkt, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2002 p.288-293 (NL)
13. Nihoul, Paul: Individus, entreprises et recours en annulation. Quelques soubresauts, Journal des tribunaux / droit européen 2002 nº 92 p.199-201 (FR)
14. Kronenberger, Vincent ; Dejmek, Paulina: Locus standi degli individui dinanzi alle Corti comunitarie ai sensi dell'art. 230 CE comma 4:Illusioni e Disillusioni in seguito alle pronunce Jégo-Quéré (T-177/01) e Uniòn de Pequeños Agricultores (C-50/00 P), The European Legal Forum 2002 p.257-265 (IT)
15. Obwexer, Walter: Nichtigkeitsklagen Einzelner gegen Gemeinschaftsakte allgemeiner Geltung, Ecolex 2002 p.854-856 (DE)
16. Kronenberger, Vincent ; Dejmek, Paulina: Die Klagebefugnis von Einzelpersonen vor den Gerichten der Gemeinschaft nach Art. 230 Abs. 4 EG: Illusionen und Ernüchterungen nach den Entscheidungen Jégo-Quéré (T-177/01) und Unión de Pequeños Agricultores (C-50/00 P), The European legal forum 2002 p.257-265 (DE)
17. Goossens, Leen: Revue de droit commercial belge 2002 p.597-599 (FR)
18. Metaxas, Antonis: I prosfati nomologia ton koinotikon dikastirion epi tis energitikis nomimopoiisis kai nomikon prosopon pros askisi akyrotikis prosfygis kata koinotikon kanonistikon praxeon: mia kritiki theorisi, Epitheorisis Dimosiou Dikaiou kai Dioikitikou Dikaiou 2002 p.863-871 (EL)
19. De Pasquale, Patrizia: Per i ricorsi di annullamento la Corte mantiene le distanze dai singoli, Diritto pubblico comparato ed europeo 2002 p.1906-1910 (IT)
20. Corthaut, Tim: Case CFI May 3, 2002, Jégo-Quéré v. Commission, T-177/01 and C-50/00 P ECJ July 25, 2002, Union de Pequeños Agricultores v. Council, The Columbia Journal of European Law 2002, Vol. 9, n° 1, p. 141-166 (EN)
21. Byström, Maria: Mycket väsen för ingenting? Enskildas snäva talerätt vid gemenskapsdomstolarna bekräftad, Europarättslig tidskrift 2002, nº 3, p. 567-576 (SV)
22. Półtorak, Nina: Kto jest związany zasadą efektywnej ochrony prawnej - uwagi na tle orzeczenia Trybunału Sprawiedliwości w sprawie Unión de Pequeños Agricultores, Kwartalnik Prawa Publicznego 2002 Vol.3 p.194-204 (PL)
23. Hanf, Dominik: Facilitating Private Applicants' Access to the European Courts ? On the Possible Impact of the CFI's Ruling in Jégo-Quéré, German Law Journal 2002, Vol. 3, n° 8, p. 1-3 (EN)
24. Lindner, Josef Franz: Bayerische Verwaltungsblätter 2003 p.12-14 (DE)
25. Braun, Jens-Daniel ; Kettner, Moira: Die Absage des EUGH an eine richterrechtliche Reform des EG-Rechtsschutzsystems, Die öffentliche Verwaltung 2003 p.58-66 (DE)
26. Prechal, S. ; Parret, L.: S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2003 p.36-39 (NL)
27. Barone, A.: Il Foro italiano 2003 IV Col.95-98 (IT)
28. Granger, Marie-Pierre: Towards a Liberalisation of Standing Conditions for Individuals Seeking Judicial Review of Community Acts: Jégo-Quéré et Cie SA v Commission and Unión de Pequeños Agricultores v Council, The Modern Law Review 2003, n° 1, p. 124-138 (EN)
29. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2003 nº 223 (NL)
30. Van den Broek, Naboth: A Long Hot Summer for Individual Concern? The European Court's Recent Case Law on Direct Actions by Private Parties ... and a Plea for a Foreign Affairs Exception, Legal Issues of Economic Integration 2003 p.61-79 (EN)
31. Granger, Marie-Pierre: Standing for the Judicial Review of Community Acts potentially harmful to the Environment: Some Light at the End of the Tunnel?, Environmental Law Review 2003 Vol. 5 p.45-56 (EN)
32. De Lange, Femke: European Court of Justice, Uniòn de Paqueños Agricultores v. Council, Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 2003 p.115-118 (EN)
33. Ragolle, Filip: Access to justice for private applicants in the Community legal order: recent (r)evolutions, European Law Review 2003 p.90-101 (EN)
34. Temple Lang, John: Actions for declarations that Community regulations are invalid: the duties of national courts under Article 10 EC, European Law Review 2003 p.102-111 (EN)
35. Engström, Johanna: Turning a Deaf Ear to Effective Judicial Protection? The ECJ's Judgment in C-50/00 P Unión de Pequeños Agricultores, Tilburg Foreign Law Review 2003 p.375-390 (EN)
36. Caranta, Roberto: I limiti alla legittimazione ad impugnare atti comunitari generali, Giurisprudenza italiana 2003 p.1463-1468 (IT)
37. Gilliaux, Pascal: L'arrêt Unión de Pequeños Agricultores: entre subsidiairité juridicitonnelle et effectivité, Cahiers de droit européen 2003 p.177-202 (FR)
38. X: Giustizia civile 2003 I p.593 (IT)
39. Köngeter, Matthias: Die Ambivalenz effektiven Rechtsschutzes Einzelner gegen EG-Verordnungen, Zeitschrift für Rechtsvergleichung, internationales Privatrecht und Europarecht 2003 p.123-132 (DE)
40. Hanf, Dominik: Talking with the "pouvoir constituant" in Times of Constitutional Reform: The European Court of Justice on Private Applicants' Access to Justice, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 2003 p.265-290 (EN)
41. Gimeno Verdejo, Carlos: Crónica de la Jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de las Comunidades Europeas. La sentencia Unión de Pequeños Agricultores. Confirmación de las estrictas condiciones de admisibilidad de los recursos de anulación de disposiciones comunitarias, Cuadernos Europeos de Deusto 2003 nº 28 p.133-140 (ES)
42. Usher, John A.: Direct and individual concern - an effective remedy or a conventional solution?, European Law Review 2003 p.575-600 (EN)
43. Groussot, Xavier: The EC System of Legal Remedies and Effective Judicial Protection: Does the System Really Need Reform?, Legal Issues of Economic Integration 2003, n° 3, p. 221-248 (EN)
44. Schwarze, Jürgen: Der Individualrechtsschutz gegen Rechtsnormen im europäischen Gemeinschaftsrecht. Anmerkungen zum Urteil des EuGH vom 25.7.2002 in der Rechtssache UPA, Der Staat des Grundgesetzes : Festschrift für Peter Badura zum siebzigsten Geburtstag 2004 p.1167-1188 (DE)
45. Kuhn, Tilman ; Christensen, Ralph: Was heißt individuelle Betroffenheit des Klägers oder wie behandelt man einen Konflikt um die Lesart des Gesetzes, Rechtssprache Europas 2004 p.389-412 (DE)
46. Metaxas, A.: Energitiki nomimopoiisi fysikon kai nomikon prosopon pros askisi akyrotikis prosfygis kata koinotikon kanonistikon praxeon: Pagiopoiisi tou nomologiakou stigmatos tou DEK?, Epitheorisis Dimosiou Dikaiou kai Dioikitikou Dikaiou 2004 p.675-686 (EL)
47. Moura Ramos, Rui Manuel: Tribunal de Primeira Instância (Primeira Secção Alargada), Acórdão de 3 de Maio de 2002, e Tribunal de Justiça, Acórdão de 25 de Julho de 2002. (Locus Standi dos Particulares no Contencioso de Anulação em Direito Comunitário), Revista de legislação e de jurisprudência 2006 p.170-188 (PT)
48. Wathelet, Melchior ; Wildemeersch, Jonathan: Recours en annulation : une première interprétation restrictive du droit d’action élargi des particuliers ?, Journal de droit européen 2012, nº 187, p.75-79 (FR)
49. Blanquet, Marc: 77. Recours de personnes physiques ou morales - Règlement - Droit à une protection juridictionnelle effective - Condition de l'affectation individuelle. CJCE, 25 juill. 2002, n° C-50/00 P, Unión de Pequeňos Agricultores (UPA) c/ Conseil de l'Union européenne, Les grands arrêts de la Cour de justice de l'Union européenne. Droit constitutionnel et institutionnel de l'Union européenne (Dalloz, 2e édition) 2023, p. 1194-1207 (FR)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Information not available

Subject-matter

• Agriculture and Fisheries
  
• - Oils and fats
  

Provisions of national law referred to

Information not available

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

• Actions for annulment
  
• Appeals : dismissal on substantive grounds
  

Formation of the Court

Cour plénière (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Gulmann

Advocate General

Jacobs

Language(s) of the Case

• Spanish
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• English