- 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-92/21: Action brought on 12 February 2021 — Darment v. Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0092
62021TN0092
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 128/43
(Case T-92/21)
(2021/C 128/51)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Darment Oy (Helsinki, Finland) (represented by: C. Ginter, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the defendant’s decision to reduce the quota allocated to the applicant for the year 2021 for the placing of hydrofluorocarbons on the market about which the applicant was informed via F-Gas Portal System of the defendant on 15 December 2020 and by the email of 12 January 2021;
—order the defendant to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed Article 266 TFEU by imposing the penalty on the applicant even though the Court annulled the defendant’s decision finding that the applicant exceeded in 2017 its quota for the placing of HFC on the market and imposing the penalty on it;
2.Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed Article 25(2) of Regulation (EU) 517/2014, (1) in conjunction with Article 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, by continuing to impose the Penalty to the applicant.
*
Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on fluorinated greenhouse gases and repealing Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 Text with EEA relevance (OJ 2014 L 150, p. 195)