- 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-142/15 P: Appeal brought on 24 March 2015 by SolarWorld AG against the order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 14 January 2015 in Case T-507/13: SolarWorld AG and others v European Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015CN0142
62015CN0142
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
8.6.2015
Official Journal of the European Union
C 190/5
—
(Case C-142/15 P)
(2015/C 190/05)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: SolarWorld AG (represented by: L. Ruessmann, avocat, J. Beck, Solicitor)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission,
Brandoni solare SpA,
Global Sun Ltd,
Silicio Solar, SAU,
Solaria Energia y Medio Ambiente, SA
Form of order sought
The Appellant claims that the Court should:
—Declare the Appeal admissible and well-founded;
—Set aside the General Court’s Order in Case T-507/13;
—Declare the Application for annulment in Case T-507/13 admissible; and
—Refer the case back to the General Court for a decision on the substance of the Application for annulment.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the appeal, the Appellant put forward the following arguments:
The General Court erred by finding that the Appellant is not directly concerned by Commission Decision 2013/423/EU (1) because that Decision would not directly affect the legal situation of the Appellant and was subject to implementing measures.
The General Court erred by finding that the Appellant is not directly affected by Commission Decision 2013/423/EU because it was implemented by Regulation 748/2013 (2). Regulation 748/2013 is a confirmatory act in relation to Decision 2013/423/EU. The Appellant had therefore standing to appeal Decision 2013/423/EU directly.
The General Court’s finding that the Decision 2013/423/EU entails implementing measures was erroneous as the General Court did not analyse whether the Commission had any discretion when adopting Regulation 748/2013 or whether the implementation of Decision 2013/423/EU was merely automatic with regard to the Appellant, which in fact was the case.
—
Commission Decision of 2 August 2013 accepting an undertaking offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China, OJ L 209, p. 26.
—
Commission Regulation of 2 August 2013 amending Regulation (EU) No 513/2013 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China, OJ L 209, p. 1.