Action brought on 30 July 2021 – Spain v Commission
(Case T-450/21)
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: S. Jiménez García and J. Rodríguez de la Rúa Puig, Agents)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/988 of 16 June 2021 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), 1 in so far as it concerns certain expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Spain;
order the Commission to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of its action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
First plea in law, alleging breach of the checks on the correctness of the calculation of the aid, including application of administrative penalties (key control), the Commission’s interpretation of Article 31(3) of Delegated Regulation No 640/2014, 2 in conjunction with Article 53(4) of Delegated Regulation No 639/2014, 3 being contrary to the principle of proportionality.
This plea consists in four parts (A to D):
A: unjustified imposition of administrative penalties for failure to fulfil the requirements of identification and registration of animals before the date fixed by a Member State, in accordance with Article 31(3) of Delegated Regulation No 640/2014, in conjunction with Article 53(4) of Delegated Regulation No 639/2014.
B to D: unjustified imposition of administrative penalties under Article 31(3) of Delegated Regulation No 640/2014 for animals in respect of which non-compliant identification and registration was found a priori during administrative checks on all the aid application files of a Member State which, like the Kingdom of Spain, applies, in accordance with Article 21(4) of Implementing Regulation No 809/2014, 4 a claimless system which, by its very nature, excludes any risk to the EAGF.
Second plea in law, alleging correct production of statistics of on-the-spot checks of sufficient quality (key control), including the size of the random sample and the effectiveness of the risk analysis, in accordance with Article 34 of Implementing Regulation No 809/2014.
____________
1 OJ 2021 L 218, p. 9.
2 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 640/2014 of 11 March 2014 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the integrated administration and control system and conditions for refusal or withdrawal of payments and administrative penalties applicable to direct payments, rural development support and cross compliance (OJ 2014 L 181, p. 48).
3 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 639/2014 of 11 March 2014 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing rules for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the common agricultural policy and amending Annex X to that Regulation (OJ 2014 L 181, p. 1).
4 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 809/2014 of 17 July 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the integrated administration and control system, rural development measures and cross compliance (OJ 2014 L 227, p. 69).