- 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-174/24: Action brought on 27 March 2024 – Djchem Chemicals Poland and The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0174
62024TN0174
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
EN
C series
—
C/2024/3342
3.6.2024
(Case T-174/24)
(C/2024/3342)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: Djchem Chemicals Poland S.A. (Wołomin, Poland), The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Akron, Ohio, United States) (represented by: C. Mereu and S. Englebert, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
—Annul Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/197 of 19 October 2023 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, (1) insofar as it classifies 1,4-Benzenediamine, N,N’-mixed Ph and tolyl derivs.; Reaction mass of N-phenyl,N’-o-tolyl-phenylene diamine, N,N’-diphenyl-p-phenylene diamine and N,N’-di-o-tolyl-phenylene diamine (‘DAPD’) as toxic for reproduction 1B (H360FD) (‘the contested act’); (2)
—Order the defendant to pay the costs of these proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging a breach of provisions under Regulation EC No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council, namely Article 36(1)(d), Article 37(5), Section 1.1.1.3, Section 1.1.1.5, Section 3.7.2.1.1, Section 3.7.2.3.1, and Table 3.7.1(a) of the Annex.
2.Second plea in law, alleging that the European Commission made a manifest error of assessment. The defendant relied on irrelevant facts, and did not take into account, carefully and impartially, all the relevant and available information on DAPD provided by the applicant before adopting the contested act.
3.Third plea in law, alleging the contested act infringes the general principles of EU law, namely the principle of proportionality, the applicants’ right to be heard and right of defence, and the principle of good administration.
(1) Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ 2008 L 353, p. 1).
(2) The contested act is published in OJ L 2024/197.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3342/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—