Case T-212/06

Bowland Dairy Products Ltd

v

Commission of the European Communities

(Action for damages – Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 – Rapid alert system – Supplementary notification – Competence of the national authorities – Commission’s opinion not binding – Modification of the subject-matter of the dispute – Inadmissibility)

Summary of the Judgment

1.      Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Subject-matter of the dispute – Delimitation – Alteration once proceedings have been started – Not allowed

(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 53; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 48(2))

2.      Non-contractual liability – Conditions

(Art. 288, second para., EC)

3.      Actions for damages – Subject-matter – Claim for compensation for damage caused by a position taken by the Commission in the context of the rapid alert system concerning food safety

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 178/2002, Art. 50)

1.      Although Article 48(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance authorises, in certain circumstances, new pleas in law to be introduced in the course of proceedings, that provision cannot in any circumstances be interpreted as authorising the applicant to bring new claims before the Court and thereby to modify the subject-matter of the proceedings.

In the context of an action for damages, the defendant institution’s act or conduct said to be the cause of the alleged loss forms part of the subject-matter of an action for damages and must be specified in the application. For the same reason, the form of order sought in such an action must be understood as referring to compensation for the loss allegedly caused by the act or conduct complained of in the application.

(see paras 36, 38)

2.      In order for the Community to incur non-contractual liability, a number of conditions must be satisfied, namely: the unlawfulness of the conduct alleged against the institutions, the fact of damage and the existence of a causal link between the alleged conduct and the damage complained of. If any one of those conditions is not satisfied, the action must be dismissed in its entirety and it is unnecessary to consider the other conditions.

(see para. 37)

3.      It is apparent from the provisions of Article 50(1) and (2) of Regulation No 178/2002, laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety, that the competent authority of the Member State concerned has sole responsibility for drafting the notifications under Article 50(3) thereof, and also for transmitting them to the Commission for communication to the other members of the network.

It is conceivable that, even in a case which is a matter for the national authorities, the Commission may express an opinion, which has no legal effects, however, and is not binding upon those authorities. Accordingly, claims for damages based on the fact that the Commission expressed such an opinion are inadmissible.

(see paras 40-41)