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-192/12: Action brought on 2 May 2012 — PAN Europe v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012TN0192

62012TN0192

May 2, 2012
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

30.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/26

(Case T-192/12)

2012/C 194/43

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J. Rutteman, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

Declare the Commission’s Decision of 9 March 2012, which found a request made by the applicant for internal review to be inadmissible, contrary to Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006/EC (1) and the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (‘Aarhus Convention’);

Annul the Commission’s Decision of 9 March 2012;

Instruct the Commission to assess, nonetheless, the substance of the request for internal review, within a period of time determined by the Court; and

Order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred when it found that the applicant did not comply with the conditions of eligibility set out in Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006, as the applicant already existed for more than two years when it made its request for internal review.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred when it stated that Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1143/2011 (2) cannot be considered an administrative act within the meaning of Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006, as it is defined in Article 2(1)(g) of that Regulation, as the decision to approve prochloraz is sufficiently individual in its effects and content to make it an administrative act as is meant in Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006.

Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies (OJ 2006 L 264, p. 13)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1143/2011 of 10 November 2011 approving the active substance prochloraz, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 and Commission Decision 2008/934/EC (OJ 2011 L 293, p. 26)

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