Action brought on 19 march 2007 - WWF-UK v Council

(Case T-91/07)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: WWF-UK Ltd (Godalming, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Sands, QC, J. Simor, Barrister, R. Stein, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

Annulment of the TACs adopted in Council Regulation No 41/2006 in respect of cod in the zones covered by Council Regulation No 423/2004 establishing measures for the recovery of cod stocks;

that the above provisions should nevertheless continue to have effect until replaced by a new measure;

that the Council pay the costs of this application.

Pleas in law and main arguments

This application is brought under Article 230 EC in respect of the total allowable catches ("TACs") for 2007 adopted by the Council under Regulation No 41/2006¹ ("the TACs regulation") for cod in zones covered by Council Regulation No 423/2004 establishing measures for the recovery of cod stocks² ("the Cod Recovery Plan"), following the Commission's proposal of 5 December 2006³.

In summary, the applicant submits that the Council has committed a manifest error of law in failing to adopt zero TACs, which it claims is, according to the relevant scientific advice, necessary if stocks are to increase from current levels, where they are at serious risk of collapse and ever return to safe biological limits:

First, the applicant claims that the relevant TACs are unlawful as they have not been set in accordance with the requirements of the Cod Recovery Plan. Moreover, according to the applicant's submissions, both the Council and the Commission appear to have relied on Article 20 of the Regulation No 2371/2002⁴ ("the 2002 regulation") in the adoption of the relevant TACs rather than on the Cod Recovery Plan.

Second, the applicant contends that the relevant TACs are unlawful because they do not comply with the precautionary principle as required by the Cod Recovery Plan, Articles 5(3), 4 and 2(1) of the 2002 Regulation, the Common Fisheries Policy , Article 174 EC and Articles 5 and 6 of the UN 1995 Agreement.

Third, the applicant claims that the adoption of the relevant TACs is irrational in that the latter have been set at a level where, according to all scientific evidence available, the stocks will either remain at levels where they are at serious risk of collapse or collapse.

Fourth, according to the applicant, the Council misused its powers by adopting TACs at levels intended to meet political and economic objectives, rather than at the levels necessary to meet the relevant objective of the Cod Recovery Plan, which is to increase cod stocks within one year, or the shortest period of time thereafter, above levels where they are at serious risk of collapse.

Furthermore, the applicant contends that should the Cod Recovery Plan not allow for the setting of a zero TAC, the plan in itself would be unlawful since it would not comply with the precautionary principle.

In addition, the applicant claims that the Council erred in law in not treating cod stocks in ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) zone VII(d) as covered by the Cod Recovery Plan.

____________

¹ - Council Regulation No 41/2006 of 21 December 2006 fixing for 2007 fishing opportunities and associatedconditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required (OJ 2007 L 15, p.1)

² - (OJ 2004 L 70, p.8)

³ - (COM (2006) 774)

⁴ - Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitationof fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (OJ 2002 L 358, p. 59)