EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62019TN0013

Case T-13/19: Action brought on 8 January 2019 — Czech Republic v Commission

OJ C 103, 18.3.2019, p. 48–48 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

18.3.2019   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/48


Action brought on 8 January 2019 — Czech Republic v Commission

(Case T-13/19)

(2019/C 103/63)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

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

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

rule that the European Commission has breached its obligations under Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, by failing, in connection with the conditional provision of traditional own resources of CZK 40 482 255 by the Czech Republic, to bring proceedings against the Czech Republic for failure to fulfil obligations in this connection or to return the sum at issue, and

order the European Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law.

The Czech Republic is of the opinion that the obligation upon the European Commission to take the abovementioned action follows from the principle of sincere cooperation provided for in Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union in conjunction with the right to effective judicial protection laid down in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Having regard to the fact that, according to case-law of the Court of Justice, (1) only the Court of Justice may authoritatively settle, in proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations, a dispute between a Member State and the European Commission in the area of traditional own resources, the European Commission must, in connection with the execution of the conditional payment in question, bring such proceedings without undue delay or return that payment if it finds no grounds upon which to bring such proceedings.

The Czech Republic paid the sum at issue into the European Commission’s account as far back as 2015. However, the European Commission has not brought proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations in that case and has not returned the sum in question conditionally paid to it, even though the Czech Republic has formally called upon it to do so. The Czech Republic therefore submits that the conditions have been met for a finding that the Commission has failed to act.


(1)  Compare judgment of 25 October 2017, Slovakia v Commission (C-593/15 P and C-594/15 P, EU:C:2017:800) and judgment of 25 October 2017, Romania v Commission (C-599/15 P, EU:C:207:801).


Top