Summary:
Original Link:
Original Article:
Case T-648/22: Judgment of the General Court of 25 June 2025 – ClientEarth v Council (Common fisheries policy – Conservation of resources – Total allowable catches – Fish stocks shared with the United Kingdom – Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom – Regulation (EU) 2022/515 – Request for internal review of an administrative act under environmental law – Article 2(1)(f) and Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 – Objective of achieving a maximum sustainable yield exploitation rate at the latest by 2020 for all stocks – Articles 2, 3, 9, 10, 15 and 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 – Socioeconomic and employment objectives – Best available scientific advice – Landing obligation – Mixed fisheries – Choke species – Precautionary approach – Ecosystem-based approach – Regulation (EU) 2019/472 – Target stocks – By-catches)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: ClientEarth AISBL (Ixelles, Belgium) (represented by: C. Ziegler, lawyer)
Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: F. Naert, A. Nowak Salles, A. Maceroni and P. Pecheux, acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes, G. Gattinara and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)
Re:
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, seeks annulment of the decision of the Council of the European Union of 26 July 2022, contained in its letter of 3 August 2022 (‘the contested decision’), rejecting as unfounded its request for internal review of 20 May 2022 under Title IV of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies, concerning Council Regulation (EU) 2022/515 of 31 March 2022 amending Regulation (EU) 2022/109 fixing for 2022 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in Union waters and for Union fishing vessels in certain non-Union waters.
Operative part of the judgment:
1. Dismisses the action;
2. Orders ClientEarth AISBL to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union;
3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.