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-386/10 P: Appeal brought on 30 July 2010 by Chalkor AE Epexergasias Metallon against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 19 May 2010 in Case T-21/05: Chalkor AE Epexergasias Metallon v European Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CN0386

62010CN0386

July 30, 2010
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

23.10.2010

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/21

(Case C-386/10 P)

()

(2010/C 288/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Chalkor AE Epexergasias Metallon (represented by: I. Forrester QC)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

Set aside or annul in whole or in part the Judgment of the General Court insofar as it rejects Halcor's claim for annulment of Article 1 of the Decision;

Annul or substantially reduce the fine imposed on Halcor or take such other action as justice may require; and

Award Halcor the costs, including its costs in the proceedings before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant submits that the contested judgment should be set aside on the following grounds:

(a)The General Court erred in applying a limited standard of judicial review. The Court did not consider the basic question of whether the fine imposed on Halcor was appropriate, fair and proportionate in relation to the gravity and duration of the unlawful conduct;

(b)The General Court infringed the principle of equal treatment. Although the Court correctly held that the Commission had infringed the principle of equal treatment by treating Halcor and the other companies in an identical manner, without such treatment being objectively justified, it failed to respect that principle thereafter;

(c)The General Court's adaptation of the fine imposed on Halcor was irrational and arbitrary; and

(d)The contested judgment contains no reasoning adequate to explain the fine imposed on Halcor.

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