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-561/19: Action brought on 13 August 2019 — Lípidos Santiga v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0561

62019TN0561

August 13, 2019
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

30.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/73

(Case T-561/19)

(2019/C 328/81)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lípidos Santiga, SA (Santa Perpètua de Mogoda, Spain) (represented by: P. Muñiz Fernández, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul Article 3 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/807 of 13 March 2019, supplementing Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the determination of high indirect land-use change-risk feedstock for which a significant expansion of the production area into land with high carbon stock is observed and the certification of low indirect land-use change-risk biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels and its Annex;

order the Commission to bear the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging that the global approach of the defendant, as a result of which palm oil qualifies as a high ILUC-risk feedstock is not proportionate.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant committed a manifest error of assessment in deciding that palm oil regardless of its origin is a high ILUC-risk feedstock.

3.Third plea in law, alleging that the criteria for the classification of palm oil as a high ILUC-risk feedstock are discriminatory.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Commission failed to conduct the necessary impact assessment prior to the adoption of the contested Regulation.

5.Fifth plea in law, alleging that the Commission failed to state the reasons underlying the design of the formula used for deciding that palm oil is a high ILUC-risk feedstock.

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