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
(Case T-630/13) (*)
((Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Transitional rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances from 2013 - Decision 2011/278/EU - National implementation measures presented by Germany - Clause relating to extremely difficult cases - Freedom to conduct a business - Right to property - Proportionality))
(2014/C 395/60)
Language of the case: German
Applicant: DK Recycling und Roheisen GmbH (Duisburg, Germany) (represented by: S. Altenschmidt, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. White, C. Hermes and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)
Application for annulment of Article 1(1) of Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2013 L 240, p. 27) in so far as Article 1(1) thereof, read in conjunction with Annex I, Point A thereto, rejects the inscription of the installation with the identification codes DE000000000001320 and DE-new-14220-0045 on the list of installations provided for in Article 11(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (OJ 2003 L 275, p. 32), and the preliminary total annual amounts of emission allowances to be allocated for free to those installations.
The Court:
1.Annuls Article 1(1) of Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council in so far as it rejects the free allocation of emission allowances for the installations listed in Annex I, Point D to that decision on the basis of a process emissions sub-installation for the production of zinc in the blast furnace and related processes;
2.Dismisses the remainder of the action;
3.Orders each party to bear its own costs.
(*)
Language of the case: German
ECLI:EU:C:2014:140
* * *