## 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

1. Whether Plaumann & Co. could demonstrate individual concern to have standing to challenge a Commission decision addressed to a third party.
2. 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.

Plaumann v Commission [1963] ECR 95