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-143/13: Action brought on 13 March 2013 — Zhejiang Heda Solar Technology v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013TN0143

62013TN0143

March 13, 2013
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

27.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 123/23

(Case T-143/13)

2013/C 123/40

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Zhejiang Heda Solar Technology Co. Ltd (Fuyang, China) (represented by: V. Akritidis and Y. Melin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

Annul, pursuant to Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the decision of the European Commission communicated by letter of 3 January 2013, No H4/JN/Ref.t13.000011, informing the applicant that it would not examine the applicant’s request to be granted the status of undertaking operating under market economy conditions, filed pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, in the antidumping proceeding concerning imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components originating in the People’s Republic of China, opened on 6 September 2012 (AD 590);

Declare inapplicable to the applicant as regards the present application, by virtue of Article 277 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Regulation (EU) No 1168/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ 2012 L 344, p. 1);

And, consequently, order the Commission and any interveners to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging breach of the principles of legal certainty, legitimate expectations and proportionality, in that the contested decision withdrew, with retroactive effect, the applicant’s previously acquired right to have its request for the status of undertaking operating under market economy conditions examined by the Commission without there being an overriding interest to justify that withdrawal.

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