- 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-436/17: Order of the General Court of 2 June 2021 — ClientEarth and Others v Commission (REACH — Commission decision granting an authorisation for some uses of lead sulfochromate yellow and of lead chromate molybdate sulfate red — Article 64 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Internal review of a marketing authorisation decision — Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 — No longer any legal interest in bringing proceedings — No need to adjudicate)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017TB0436
62017TB0436
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 289/35
(Case T-436/17) (*)
(REACH - Commission decision granting an authorisation for some uses of lead sulfochromate yellow and of lead chromate molybdate sulfate red - Article 64 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Internal review of a marketing authorisation decision - Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - No longer any legal interest in bringing proceedings - No need to adjudicate)
(2021/C 289/51)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: ClientEarth, (London, United Kingdom), European Environmental Bureau (EEB) (Brussels, Belgium), The International Chemical Secretariat (Gothenburg, Sweden), International POPs Elimination Network (IPEN) (Gothenburg) (represented by: A. Jones, Solicitor)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara, R. Lindenthal and K. Mifsud-Bonnici, acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the applicants: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: C. Meyer-Seitz, H. Shev, L. Zettergren, A. Alriksson, J. Lundberg and H. Eklinder, acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the defendant: European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere and F. Becker, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, (i), of Commission Decision C(2017) 2914 final of 2 May 2017, rejecting a request for internal review, made under Article 10 of 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), of Commission Implementing Decision C(2016) 5644 final granting an authorisation for some uses of lead sulfochromate yellow and of lead chromate molybdate sulfate red under Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1, corrigendum OJ 2007 L 136, p. 3) and, (ii), of that implementing decision.
Operative part of the order
1.There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.
2.The European Commission shall bear its own costs and shall pay those incurred by ClientEarth, European Environmental Bureau (EEB), The International Chemical Secretariat and International POPs Elimination Network (IPEN).
3.The Kingdom of Sweden and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) shall each bear their own costs.
(*) Language of the case: English.
(1) OJ C 300, 11.9.2017.