- 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-21/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — European Commission v Rusal Armenal ZAO, Council of the European Union (Appeal — Dumping — Imports of certain aluminium foil originating in Armenia, Brazil and China — Accession of the Republic of Armenia to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) — Article 2(7) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 — Whether compatible with the Agreement on implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT))
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62014CA0021
62014CA0021
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 311/7
(Case C-21/14 P)
((Appeal - Dumping - Imports of certain aluminium foil originating in Armenia, Brazil and China - Accession of the Republic of Armenia to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) - Article 2(7) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 - Whether compatible with the Agreement on implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT)))
(2015/C 311/08)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: European Commission (represented by: J.-F. Brakeland, M. França and T. Maxian Rusche, Agents)
Other parties to the proceedings: Rusal Armenal ZAO (represented by B. Evtimov, lawyer), Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Boelaert and J. P. Hix, Agents, and by B. O’Connor, Solicitor, and S. Gubel, avocat)
Intervener in support of the appellant: European Parliament (represented by D. Warin and A. Auersperger Matić, Agents)
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1)Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in Rusal Armenal v Council (T-512/09, EU:T:2013:571);
2)Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for it to rule on the pleas in law on which it did not adjudicate;
3)Reserves the costs.
(1)
OJ C 61, 1.3.2014.