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-370/11: Action brought on 8 July 2011 — Poland v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TN0370

62011TN0370

July 8, 2011
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

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 290/9

(Case T-370/11)

2011/C 290/12

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: M. Szpunar, Undersecretary of State)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul in its entirety Commission Decision 2011/278/EU of 27 April 2011 (notified under document C(2011) 2772) determining transitional Union-wide rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2011 L 130, p. 1);

order the European Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law.

First plea in law

Infringement of the second subparagraph of Article 194(2) TFEU, in conjunction with Article 192(2)(c) TFEU, by failing to take account of the particular characteristics of individual Member States concerning fuel and by calculating benchmarks on the basis of the reference efficiency of natural gas and taking that fuel as the reference fuel.

Second plea in law

Infringement of the principle of equal treatment and of Article 191(2) TFEU in conjunction with Article 191(3) TFEU by failing to take account, when drawing up the contested decision, of the diversity of the situations in individual regions of the European Union.

Third plea in law

Infringement of Article 5(4) TEU (principle of proportionality) by setting the benchmarks in the contested decision at a more restrictive level than attainment of the objectives of Directive 2003/87/EC requires.

Fourth plea in law

Infringement of Article 10a, in conjunction with Article 1, of Directive 2003/87/EC and lack of competence for the European Commission to adopt the contested measure.

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