- 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-620/14: Order of the General Court of 16 September 2015 — Diapharm v Commission (Action for failure to act — Consumer protection — Health claims made on foods — Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 — Botanical substances — Time-limit for bringing an action — No legal interest in bringing proceedings — Act not amenable to review — Inadmissibility)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62014TB0620
62014TB0620
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 381/33
(Case T-620/14) (<span class="super">1</span>)
((Action for failure to act - Consumer protection - Health claims made on foods - Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 - Botanical substances - Time-limit for bringing an action - No legal interest in bringing proceedings - Act not amenable to review - Inadmissibility))
(2015/C 381/37)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Diapharm GmbH & Co. KG (Münster, Germany) (represented by: M. Weidner, N. Hußmann and T. Guttau, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Wilderspin and S. Grünheid, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application seeking a declaration that the Commission failed to act in that it unlawfully refrained from ordering the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to evaluate the health claims relating to botanical substances as a condition prior to the adoption of the definitive list of authorised health claims in accordance with Article 13(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods (OJ 2006 L 404, p. 9).
Operative part of the order
1.The action is dismissed as inadmissible.
2.Diapharm GmbH & Co. KG shall pay the costs.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 409, 17.11.2014.
Language of the case: German