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 T-762/16: Order of the General Court of 15 January 2018 — ArcelorMittal Belval & Differdange and ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe v ECHA (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents held by the ECHA — Request relating to documents and to the identity of an initial requestor of access to information of a registrant of substances under Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Partial refusal of access — Withdrawal of the decision refusing access — No need to adjudicate)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TB0762

62016TB0762

January 15, 2018
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

12.3.2018

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/26

(Case T-762/16) (Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents held by the ECHA - Request relating to documents and to the identity of an initial requestor of access to information of a registrant of substances under Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Partial refusal of access - Withdrawal of the decision refusing access - No need to adjudicate)

(2018/C 094/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: ArcelorMittal Belval & Differdange SA (Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg) and ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe AG (Duisburg, Germany) (represented by: H. Scheidmann and M. Kottmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented: initially by M. Heikkilä, C. Buchanan and E. Maurage, and subsequently by M. Heikkilä, C. Buchanan and W. Broere, acting as Agents, and by G. Gilmore, Barrister)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Decision ATD/52/2016 of the ECHA of 26 September 2016, notified to the applicants on 28 September 2016, which granted partial access to the requested documents regarding an earlier application for access to documents held by the ECHA.

Operative part of the order

1.There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2.There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene made by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

3.The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) shall, in addition to bearing its own costs, pay those incurred by ArcelorMittal Belval & Differdange SA and ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe AG.

4.The EMA shall bear its own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.

(1) OJ C 14, 16.1.2017.

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