- 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 C-252/23 P: Appeal brought on 17 April 2023 by European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 07 February 2023 in Case T-81/22, Euranimi v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0252
62023CN0252
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
30.5.2023
Official Journal of the European Union
C 189/26
—
(Case C-252/23 P)
(2023/C 189/35)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) (represented by: M. Campa, D. Rovetta, V. Villante, avvocati, P. Gjørtler, advokat,)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
Form of order sought
The appellant claims that the Court should:
—declare admissible the present appeal;
—set aside the order under appeal and declare the action brought by Euranimi admissible;
—send back the case to the General Court for examining the substance of Euranimi’s action;
—order the European Commission to bear the legal cost of the present appeal and of the procedure at first instance.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on three main pleas in law:
First plea: error in law in interpreting the Article 263 (4) TFEU and in particular the requisite of ‘direct and individual concern’ — wrong qualification of facts.
Second plea: error in law in interpreting the final limb of Article 263 (4) TFEU and the requisite and notion of regulatory act which does not entail implementing measures — wrong qualification of facts and distortion of evidence.
Third plea: wrong qualification of facts and distortion of evidence.
—