Action brought on 4 April 2011 - Spain v Commission

(Case T-204/11)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. Muñoz Pérez)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

annul Commission Regulation (EU) No 15/2011 of 10 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 2074/2005 as regards recognised testing methods for detecting marine biotoxins in live bivalve molluscs, and

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the contested regulation the Commission decided to impose the liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method as the reference method for the detection of marine lipophilic toxins, replacing the mouse bioassay method.

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

1.    First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 168 TFEU and the principle of proportionality which should govern the adoption of decisions by the institutions of the European Union.

It is stated in this regard that the new reference method established for the detection of lipophilic toxins is no more beneficial for the protection of public health than mouse bioassay.

2.     Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality.

-    It is stated in this regard that by adopting the decision to replace mouse bioassay with LC-MS/MS as the reference method for the detection of lipophilic toxins, the Commission did not assess all the relevant facts and circumstances of the situation that it intended to regulate, in that it failed to take into consideration the economic impact that such a change would have on the productive sector concerned.

3.     Third plea in law, alleging failure to observe the principle of legitimate expectations.

-    According to the applicant State, the producers of live bivalve molluscs were entitled to expect that the Commission would not decide to replace mouse bioassay as the reference method for the detection of lipophilic toxins until the conditions set out in point 4 of Part B of Chapter III of Annex III to Regulation No 2074/2005, in its original wording, had been fulfilled.

____________