Judicial review of bottom‐trawling restrictions in EU marine protected areas: Case T‐265/23 VDK v Commission

Abstract This case note analyses the EU General Court's judgment in VDK v Commission (Judgment of 21 May 2025, Case T‐265/23), which concerns the legality of spatial fisheries restrictions adopted to protect marine Natura 2000 sites in the German Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). As the applicant did not appeal the judgment, it has become final. The applicant, a German fishers' association, challenged the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/340, which closed four sites in Germany's North Sea EEZ (in addition to three Dutch sites) to bottom‐contacting gear and to gillnets and entangling nets. The applicant argued that the measure was, insofar as it concerned the German sites, disproportionate and that the European Commission exceeded its powers under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The Court dismissed both pleas. First, it reaffirmed the broad discretion enjoyed by European Union (EU) institutions in the field of the CFP, applying a deferential standard of judicial review and endorsing a precautionary approach to bottom‐contacting fishing gear in marine protected areas. Second, it confirmed the Commission's competence to protect gravel beds under Article 11(2) CFP‐Regulation in conjunction with Article 13(4) MSFD. The judgment strengthens the legal resilience of spatial fisheries restrictions used to implement EU biodiversity law, such as the Birds and Habitats Directives. However, consistent with past judgments, this limited standard of judicial review will generally shield measures adopted under the CFP from challenge, specifically when they are challenged based on allegedly too high environmental protection ambition.