EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-773/23 P: Appeal brought on 14 December 2023 by European Crop Care Association (ECCA) against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 4 October 2023 in Case T-77/20, Ascenza Agro and Industrias Afrasa v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0773

62023CN0773

December 14, 2023
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

Official Journal of the European Union

Series C

C/2024/1539

26.2.2024

(Case C-773/23 P)

(C/2024/1539)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: European Crop Care Association (ECCA) (represented by: S. Pappas and A. Pappas, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: Ascenza Agro, SA, Industrias Afrasa, SA, European Commission, Kingdom of Denmark, French Republic and Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL)

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

Set aside the judgment under appeal;

After setting aside the appealed judgment, annul the contested regulation; and

Order the European Commission to pay its own costs and the costs of the appellant in the present proceedings and the proceedings before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellants request the Court of Justice to review and set aside the judgment under appeal, based on four grounds.

First, that the General Court infringed Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 (1) by upholding the use of the read-across and weight of evidence approach regardless of the lack of legal basis for such application;

Second, that the General Court infringed article 296 TFEU;

Third, that the General Court infringed the applicable procedural requirements;

Fourth, that the contested judgment infringes the read-across method and contains contradictory reasoning.

(1) Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC (OJ 2009, L 309, p. 1).

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1539/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

* * *

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia