- 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-297/21: Action brought on 21 May 2021 — Troy Chemical and Troy v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0297
62021TN0297
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
19.7.2021
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 289/44
(Case T-297/21)
(2021/C 289/60)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: Troy Chemical Co. BV (Delft, Netherlands) and Troy Corp. (Florham Park, New Jersey, United States) (represented by: D. Abrahams, H. Widemann and Ł. Gorywoda, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
—annul the defendant’s Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/348 of 25 February 2021 (1) in its entirety;
—take such other or further measure as justice may require; and
—order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging that, in setting the three-year approval period for carbendazim, the defendant committed an error of law, misused its powers, breached legitimate expectations (derived from applicable guidance), breached the principle of non-discrimination and committed a manifest error of appraisal.
2.Second plea in law, alleging that, in reaching the conclusion that ‘specific conditions’ were required to ban biocidal product authorisations for use in paints and plasters to be used outdoors, the defendant committed a manifest error of appraisal and a misuse of its powers.
3.Third plea in law, alleging that, in reaching the conclusion that ‘specific conditions’ were required to ban placing on the market of specific treated articles (paints and plasters treated with/incorporating carbendazim) for use outdoors, the defendant committed a manifest error of appraisal as well as an error of law.
4.Fourth plea in law, alleging that, in reaching the conclusion that ‘specific conditions’ were required for labelling of paints and plasters treated with/incorporating carbendazim for use outdoors to remind users of a ban on use outdoors, the defendant committed a manifest error of law and fact.
* Language of the case: English.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/348 of 25 February 2021 approving carbendazim as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 7 and 10 (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2021 L 68, p. 174-177).