- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-746/15: Order of the General Court of 9 November 2016 — Biofa v Commission (Action for annulment — Plant protection products — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2069 — Approval of the basic substance sodium hydrogen carbonate — Lack of direct concern — Inadmissibility)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015TB0746(01)
62015TB0746(01)
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
C 6/37
(Case T-746/15)(Action for annulment - Plant protection products - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2069 - Approval of the basic substance sodium hydrogen carbonate - Lack of direct concern - Inadmissibility)
(2017/C 006/46)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Biofa AG (Münsingen, Germany) (represented by: C. Stallberg and S. Knoblich, and subsequently by C. Stallberg, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Ondrůšek, G. von Rintelen and F. Moro, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2069 of 17 November 2015 approving the basic substance sodium hydrogen carbonate in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2015 L 301, p. 42).
Operative part of the order
1.The action is dismissed as inadmissible.
2.There is no need to adjudicate on the application to intervene of the Kingdom of Denmark.
3.Biofa AG shall pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.
4.The Kingdom of Denmark shall bear its own costs relating to the application to intervene.
(1)
OJ C 59, 15.2.2016