Case T-94/04

European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and Others

v

Commission of the European Communities

(Action for annulment – Objection of inadmissibility – Directive 2003/112/EC – Standing to bring proceedings)

Summary of the Order

1.      Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them – Directive concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market – Actions by associations having special consultative status with Community institutions and/or with national or supranational authorities – Inadmissibility

(Art. 230, fourth para., EC; Commission Directive 2003/112)

2.      European Communities – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – Measures of general scope – Need for natural or legal persons to have recourse to a plea of illegality or a reference for a preliminary ruling on validity

(Arts 230, fourth para., EC, 234 EC and 241 EC)

1.      An action for annulment brought by associations whose goal is to promote the protection and the conservation of the environment and by a company whose goal is to promote sustainable alternatives to pesticides against Directive 2003/112 amending Directive 91/414 to include the active substance paraquat is inadmissible.

The adverse effects the contested act has on the interests defended by the associations and on the property rights of one of them do not establish that they are individually concerned by that act, since the provisions thereof affect them in their objective capacity as entities active in the protection of the environment, in the same manner as any other person in the same situation.

Moreover, the fact that the applicants have special advisory status with the European institutions and/or with national or supranational authorities does not in itself establish that they are individually concerned by the contested act. The fact that a person participates, in one way or another, in the process leading to the adoption of a Community act does not distinguish him individually in relation to the act in question unless the relevant Community legislation has laid down specific procedural guarantees for such a person.

Likewise, the standing conferred on the applicants in some of the legal systems of the Member States is irrelevant for the purposes of determining whether they have standing to bring an action for annulment of a Community act pursuant to the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC.

Moreover, the fact that, in the statement of reasons for a regulation proposal, the Commission states that the applicants have standing does not exempt them from the requirement of having to prove that they are individually concerned by the contested act. The principles governing the hierarchy of norms preclude secondary legislation from conferring standing on individuals who do not meet the requirements of the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC. A fortiori the same holds true for the statement of reasons of a proposal for secondary legislation.

(see paras 53, 55-58, 66-68)

2.      By Article 230 EC and Article 241 EC, on the one hand, and by Article 234 EC, on the other, the EC Treaty has established a complete system of legal remedies and procedures designed to ensure judicial review of the legality of acts of the institutions, and has entrusted such review to the Community courts. Under that system, where natural or legal persons cannot, by reason of the conditions for admissibility laid down in the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC, directly challenge Community measures of general application, they are able, depending on the case, either indirectly to plead the invalidity of such acts before the Community courts under Article 241 EC or to do so before the national courts and ask them, since they have no jurisdiction themselves to declare those measures invalid, to make a reference to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling on validity.

(see para. 62)