Facts
- Plaumann & Co., a German importer of clementines, contested a decision by the European Commission addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany.
- The Commission refused to authorize the suspension of customs duties on clementines, maintaining the applicable tariff.
- The decision impacted all importers of clementines, not solely Plaumann & Co.
- Plaumann & Co. claimed they were directly and individually affected by the measure.
Issues
- Whether Plaumann & Co. could demonstrate individual concern to have standing to challenge a Commission decision addressed to a third party.
- Whether inclusion in the group of clementine importers sufficed to satisfy the threshold for individual concern under EU law.
Decision
- The European Court of Justice set out the "individual concern" test, requiring applicants to be affected by a measure due to attributes or circumstances differentiating them from all others.
- The Court determined Plaumann & Co. belonged to an open category of traders, as importing clementines was an activity available to anyone at any time.
- The decision was not directed at Plaumann & Co. in a manner distinguishing them from all other importers.
- Plaumann & Co. did not meet the individual concern test and, therefore, lacked standing to challenge the Commission's decision.
Legal Principles
- The "individual concern" criterion narrows standing to those affected in a unique or distinctive way beyond being part of a generally affected class.
- Membership in an open and indeterminate category is insufficient to establish individual concern.
- The Plaumann test imposes a strict standard for standing in annulment actions under Article 263 TFEU.
- Later case law, such as Codorniu (Case C-309/89), recognized exceptions for fixed and ascertainable groups, but Plaumann remains the primary authority.
Conclusion
The Plaumann decision established a restrictive "individual concern" test for standing in EU law, generally precluding applicants from challenging EU acts unless uniquely differentiated from all others affected, thereby significantly limiting access to judicial review.