- 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 C-118/12 P: Appeal brought on 5 March 2012 by Enviro Tech Europe Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 16 December 2011 in Case T-291/04: Enviro Tech Europe Ltd, Enviro Tech International, Inc. v European Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012CN0118
62012CN0118
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
28.7.2012
Official Journal of the European Union
C 227/6
—
(Case C-118/12 P)
2012/C 227/10
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: Enviro Tech Europe Ltd (represented by: C. Mereu, K. Van Maldegem, avocats)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Enviro Tech International, Inc.
Form of order sought
The appellant claims that the Court should:
—set aside the judgment of the General Court in Case T-291/04 as regards the Appellant's claim for damages; and
—declare the Respondent liable for damages suffered by the Appellant; or
—alternatively, refer the case back to the General Court to rule on the Appellant's claim for damages; and
—order the Respondent to pay all the costs of these proceedings (including the costs before the General Court).
Pleas in law and main arguments
The Appellant submits that, in dismissing its application for damages on the grounds that the Appellant had failed to establish the existence of unlawful action on the part of the Commission, the General Court breached European Union law. In particular, the Appellant contends that the General Court committed an error in its interpretation of the Judgment of the Court in Case C-425/08 and, as a consequence, it made an error in law in failing to assess the third part of the Appellant's first plea of illegality in relation to ‘normal handling or use’ and concluding that the application for damages should be dismissed.
For these reasons the Appellant claims that the judgment of the General Court in Case T-291/04 should be set aside as regards the Appellant's claim for damages and the Respondent should be declared liable for damages suffered by the Appellant.
—