Did the EU fisheries Ministers act in accordance with the law when setting Baltic fishing quotas for 2024?

CCB considers it clear that the EU Council decided to ignore legal safeguards and limits, imposing Baltic fishing quotas (Total Allowable Catches - TACs) for 2024 above scientific advice for many of the Baltic Sea's fish stocks. The decision also ignored ecosystem-based considerations such as food web dynamics, or warnings that genetically distinct sub-populations of herring could be at risk.

In light of the very poor status of the Baltic Sea and its fish stocks, in January 2024 CCB requested an internal review (a formal request to reconsider the decision) of the 2023 AGRIFISH Council decisions. CCB asked the EU Council to justify its decisions and called for the TACs to be brought in line with wider environmental obligations and the objectives set out in the EU's Common Fisheries Policy (CFP).

The right to request an internal review of the Council's decision is given to NGOs such as CCB via the EU Aarhus regulation (Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006).

The EU Council rejected the request, with the claim that nothing was incorrect in the Council’s decision.

Therefore, CCB decided to appeal* it and ask the EU Court for an annulment  of the Council's decision not to review the 2024 Baltic quotas for Bothnian herring, central Baltic herring and sprat.

The EU Council submitted its defence to the annulment back in November 2024, and CCB followed by submitting its reply in January 2025.

In February 2025, the French Republic submitted an intervention statement* supporting the Council. The Council filed its rejoinder* in March 2025, and CCB submitted its observations on the French intervention the same month.

Given the technical and scientific nature of the case, the Court put a series of clarifying questions to the parties, who submitted their written answers between May and June 2026.

The oral hearing* was set on 14 October 2026.

In the first-half of 2027, the final verdict of the EU Court will be delivered. A ruling in CCB’s favour would limit how far ministers can deviate from scientific advice in the future. It would set a precedent and clarify how environmental law must be applied when quotas are set, in the Baltic Sea and across the EU.

* Check the vocabulary in the infographic below.

The application for annulment rests on several pleas, which explore the following claims:

1. a direct violation of the limit in Article 4(6) of the Baltic MultiAnnual Plan (Regulation (EU) 2016/1139), which requires a less than 5% probability that the spawning stock falls below Blim;
2. TACs for Bothnian and central Baltic herring set in breach of the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) obligation under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) Basic Regulation and the Baltic MAP;
3. failure to apply the precautionary approach in setting those TACs;
4. failure to apply the ecosystem-based approach, for the herring and sprat TACs, which also undermines the effectiveness of the Marine Strategy Framework, and the Habitats and Birds Directives;
5. failure to take sufficient and appropriate remedial measures under Article 5 of the Baltic MAP.

Extra Resources

Timeline

We filed the Court case against the EU Council in July 2024 and the final verdict is expected in the first-half of 2027.

Have a look at the timeline below: it´s a long journey, but with your help we can advocate for a fair Baltic Sea.

Donate now and be a Herring Hero!

Media coverage

Plea for the Sea - Herring Heroes: advocate for a fair Baltic Sea!

The continued decline of our stocks caused by the Ministries continuously acting like it’s business as usual has to stop. It’s time we demand legal action of the flagrant disregard for the law and the environment.