- 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-24/09: Order of the General Court of 16 June 2010 — Biocaps v Commission (Competition — Administrative procedure — Decision ordering an inspection — Article 20(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Existence of the addressee of the decision — Action manifestly unfounded in law)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62009TB0024(01)
62009TB0024(01)
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
14.8.2010
Official Journal of the European Union
C 221/44
(Case T-24/09)(1)
(Competition - Administrative procedure - Decision ordering an inspection - Article 20(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Existence of the addressee of the decision - Action manifestly unfounded in law)
2010/C 221/73
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: Biocaps (Orsay, France) (represented by: Y.-R. Guillou, H. Speyart van Woerden and T. Verstraeten, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet and É. Gippini Fournier, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2008) 6524 of 29 October 2008, in Case COMP/39510, ordering Laboratoire Champagnat Desmounlins Philippakis, and all of the entities controlled directly or indirectly by it, to submit to an inspection pursuant to Article 20(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 [EC] and 82 [EC] (OJ 2002 L 1, p. 1).
Operative part of the order
1.The action is dismissed as manifestly unfounded in law;
2.Biocaps is ordered to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission.
(1)
OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.