Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/22

(Case T-163/15)

(2015/C 178/22)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Delta Group agroalimentare Srl (Porto Viro, Italy) (represented by: V. Migliorini, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Forms of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—declare null and void and, at all events, annul letter Ref. Ares (2015) 528512, of 9 February 2015, from Jerzy Plewa, Director-General of the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development at the European Commission, addressed to Mr Scabin, the applicant’s authorised representative, received on the same date, rejecting the applicant’s request of 13 January 2015 that the Commission take measures pursuant to either Article 219(1) or Article 221 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, and, in particular, fix the export refunds pursuant to Article 196 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, in the poultrymeat sector.

—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.

1.First plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment and breach of Article 219(1) and Article 221 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 671).

—The applicant claims in that regard that the Commission’s statement that the trade statistics for the first 11 months of 2014 show a 5 % increase in exports compared to the same period in 2013 is contradicted by the right-hand column of the table found on page 19 of the same report on the market situation for poultrymeat of the Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets of 22 January 2015, cited by the Commission, which showed that in the first 11 months of 2013, European Union exports of poultrymeat came to EUR 1 936 000 000, while in the first 11 months of 2014 those exports came to only EUR 1 886 838 000, amounting to a 2.5 % decline and not a 5 % increase, and that the Commission also erred in its assessment of prices, which it defined as ‘stable’, even though they represent a severe decrease of approximately 8 %, as page 9 of the report shows and therefore constitutes a manifest error of assessment and a breach of Article 219(1) and Article 221 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.

2.Second plea in law, alleging infringement of essential procedural requirements, and in particular, of Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

—The applicant claims in that regard that the Commission’s decision to reject the request for measures to be taken pursuant to Article 221 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 has been taken without the advice of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets, thereby breaching an essential procedural requirement set out in Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, applicable by virtue of the reference made in Article 229 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, which, in turn, is referred to in Article 221 of the latter regulation.