Following up on this post, blog reader Laurens Ankersmit points me to an EU General Court order deciding that the action brought against the seal product ban under EU law was inadmissible because the applicants did not have standing, on the basis that they were not directly and individually concerned by the Regulation. So, nothing substantive was said about the compatibility of the regulation with primary EU law.
He notes that there might still be a challenge of the Regulation through a reference for a preliminary ruling by a national court, but the direct action failed.
The EU court web site does not make the order easy to link to, but go here, then click on "submit", and it's the most recent document.
ADDED: More details from Laurens Ankersmit:
There is a second case before the General Court. This is a direct action brought by partly the same applicants on the validity of a Commission Regulation implementing the Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council.
So there are two cases:
- The first is case T-18/10, the challenge of the ‘parent’ measure, Regulation 1007/2009. This action was held to be inadmissible.
- The second is case T-526/10, where the Commission regulation 737/2010 implementing Regulation 1007/2009, is challenged. This case is still pending…
If the applicants do have standing in the second case, there might be a plea of illegality in which the parent measure (Regulation 1007/2009) can be challenged.
Again, if subsequently a national court decides to make a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice and poses questions on the validity of one of the regulations or both, the Court can declare the regulations invalid. That is, if also in the second case the applicants lack standing. I think that their chances are better in the second case, but we will have to see how it plays out.
