Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62016CJ0338

    Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 17 May 2017.
    Portuguese Republic v European Commission.
    Appeal — EAGF and EAFRD — European Commission implementing decision — Notification to the addressee — Subsequent rectification of the print lay-out of the annex — Publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union — Period allowed for commencing proceedings — Point from which time starts to run — Delay — Inadmissibility.
    Case C-338/16 P.

    Court reports – general

    Case C‑338/16 P

    Portuguese Republic

    v

    European Commission

    (Appeal — EAGF and EAFRD — European Commission implementing decision — Notification to the addressee — Subsequent rectification of the print lay-out of the annex — Publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union — Period allowed for commencing proceedings — Point from which time starts to run — Delay — Inadmissibility)

    Summary — Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber), 17 May 2017

    1. Appeal—Grounds—Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General Court—Inadmissibility—Challenge to the interpretation or application of EU law made by the General Court—Admissibility

      Art. 256(1), second para, TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58 first para; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 168(1)(d), and 169(2)]

    2. Actions for annulment—Time-limits—Point from which time starts to run—Notification—Concept

      (Art. 263, sixth para, TFEU and 297(2) third para, TFEU

    3. Actions for annulment—Time-limits—Point from which time starts to run—Date of notification of the decision—Date on which a measure came to the knowledge of the applicant

      (Art. 263, sixth para, TFEU)

    4. Actions for annulment—Action against a decision confirming an earlier decision not challenged within the time—Inadmissibility

      (Art. 263 TFEU)

    1.  See the text of the decision.

      (see paras 19, 20)

    2.  It follows from a combined reading of the sixth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU and the third subparagraph of Article 297(2) TFEU that, so far as actions for annulment are concerned, the date to be taken into account for the purposes of determining the starting point of the period prescribed for instituting proceedings is the date of publication, when such publication, which is a precondition for the coming into force of the measure, is provided for in that Treaty, and the date of notification in the other cases referred to in the third subparagraph of Article 297(2) TFEU, including the date of decisions which specify those to whom they are addressed. It follows that the notification of a measure is not subsidiary to the publication of that measure in the Official Journal of the European Union, for the purposes of determining the starting point of the period prescribed for instituting proceedings applicable to the addressee of that measure.

      (see paras 36, 38)

    3.  See the text of the decision.

      (see para 47)

    4.  See the text of the decision.

      (see para 51)

    Top