This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Plaumann & Co v Commission [1963] ECR 95:

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 04/01/2024 07:14

Judgement for the case Plaumann & Co v Commission

Table Of Contents

  • In 1961 the German Government requested Community to authorize it to suspend the collection of duties on clementines imported from non-member countries.

    • Community refused the request & addressed its answer to the German Government.

  • Applicant was an importer of clementines who contested the legality of Community’s decision.

ECJ

  • Held that Applicant could not bring an action under Article 230.

  • It then set out the following test for individual concern, and concluded that Applicant had no standing:

Persons other than those to whom a decision is addressed may only claim to be individually concerned if that decision affects them by reason of certain attributes which are peculiar to them or by reason of circumstances in which they are differentiated from all other persons, and by virtue of these factors distinguishes them individually just as in the case of the person addressed.

In the present case the applicant is affected by the disputed Decision as an importer of clementines, that is to say, by reason of a commercial activity which may at any time be practised by any persons and is not therefore such as to distinguish the applicant in relation to the contested Decision as in the case of the addressee. For these reasons the present action for annulment must be declared inadmissible.

  • Test = 1st sentence of the extract: Plaintiffs who claim to be individually concerned by a decision addressed to another can do so only if they are differentiated from all other persons & by reason of these distinguishing features are singled out in the same was as the initial addressee.

    • Test nonetheless recognises that it’s possible for there to be more than one Applicant who is individually concerned.

  • Application of test = 2nd sentence: A failed because it practiced a commercial activity that could be carried on by any person at any time.

  • For criticism see Craig and de Burca

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on Plaumann & Co v Commission

EU Integration Law Notes
58 total pages
9 purchased

A collection of the best EU Integration notes the director of Oxbridge ...

European Human Rights Law Notes
305 total pages
213 purchased

European Human Rights law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxfor...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
European Law Notes
1,161 total pages
1033 purchased

European Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...