EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-76/20: Action brought on 7 February 2020 — Czech Republic v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TN0076

62020TN0076

February 7, 2020
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

30.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/37

(Case T-76/20)

(2020/C 103/52)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Pavliš, O. Serdula and J. Vláčil, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) CCI 2014CZ06RDNP 001 of 29 November 2019 on the suspension of interim payments linked to the Rural Development Programme of the Czech Republic for the period 2014-2020 and related to the expenditure incurred in the periods between 16 October 2018 and 31 December 2018 and between 1 January 2019 and 31 March 2019 (notified under number C(2019) 8647 final);

order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 41(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Regulation No 1306/2013’) on the grounds that the Commission incorrectly takes the view that the subsidies to which the expenditure in question relates were provided in breach of national legislation. However, there could not have been any infringement of the national legislation concerned since that legislation does not apply to the type of subsidies which the suspended payments concern.

2.Second plea in law, also alleging infringement of Article 41(1) of Regulation No 1306/2013. Even if the national legislation concerned were to apply to that type of subsidy (quod non), part of the suspended payments relate to projects to which that legislation could not apply ratione temporis.

(1) Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 352/78, (EC) No 165/94, (EC) No 2799/98, (EC) No 814/2000, (EC) No 1290/2005 and (EC) No 485/2008 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 549).

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia